Donald Trump in Paris: The curious case of his friend Jim
For all things Paris, President Donald Trump’s go-to guy is Jim. The way Trump tells it — Jim is a friend who loves Paris and used to visit every year. Yet when Trump travels to the city Thursday for his first time as president, it’s unlikely that Jim will tag along. Jim doesn’t go to Paris anymore. Trump says that’s because the city has been infiltrated by foreign extremists. Whether Jim exists is unclear. Trump has never given his last name. The White House has not responded to a request for comment about who Jim is or whether he will be on the trip. Trump repeatedly talked about the enigmatic Jim while on the campaign trail, but his friend didn’t receive widespread attention until Trump became president. For Trump, Jim’s story serves as a cautionary tale — a warning that even a place as lovely as Paris can be ruined if leaders are complacent about terrorism. Jim’s biggest moment in the spotlight was during a high-profile Trump speech in February at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland. Trump explained that Jim “loves the City of Lights, he loves Paris. For years, every year during the summer, he would go to Paris. It was automatic, with his wife and his family.” Trump one day asked Jim: “How’s Paris doing?” “’Paris?” Jim replied, as relayed by Trump. “‘I don’t go there anymore. Paris is no longer Paris.’” The mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, responded by tweeting a photo of herself with Mickey and Minnie Mouse inviting Trump “and his friend Jim” to France to “celebrate the dynamism and the spirit of openness of #Paris.” France’s then-Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault also took to Twitter, noting that 3.5 million American tourists had visited France last year. The Jim story highlights differences on immigration between Trump and major European leaders, including Trump’s host in Paris, French President Emmanuel Macron. Trump has put immigration at the core of his anti-terrorism strategy. He proposed a Muslim ban during the campaign and is fighting in the courts to temporarily bar travelers from six Muslim-majority nations as well as refugees. Macron is an outspoken critic of discriminatory policies against France’s Muslim population. He favors strong external European Union borders and he’s also called for a united European policy on immigration so that countries like Greece are not disproportionately affected by the influx of refugees. Trump believes European policies fall short of any credible efforts to protect the public. He has vowed to push forward with a plan to build a wall along America’s southern border with Mexico and he advocates for “extreme vetting” to “keep terrorists out.” Trump never endorsed Macron’s election opponent, far-right candidate Marine Le Pen, but in an interview with The Associated Press, he noted that terrorist attacks in France would “probably help” her win since “she’s the strongest on borders and she’s the strongest on what’s been going on in France.” Trump has criticized several European leaders, accusing them of lax counterterrorism policies. He lashed out at London Mayor Sadiq Khan after an attack on London Bridge last month. In a February speech, Trump denounced Sweden’s policies and talked about “what’s happening last night in Sweden.” Swedish officials sought clarification because there were no known attacks in their country that night. Trump took to Twitter to explain: “My statement as to what’s happening in Sweden was in reference to a story that was broadcast on @FoxNews concerning immigrants & Sweden.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Daniel Sutter: Forget Paris
President Donald Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord last week, setting off a firestorm of criticism. For instance, a New York Daily News headlined: “Trump to World: Drop Dead.” The withdrawal raises questions about global warming policies and their formulation. President Barack Obama and other world leaders signed the Paris Accord in December 2015. The U.S. and other developed nations promised greenhouse gas emissions cuts in the Accord. The Clean Power Plan, which significant restricts the use of coal, counts towards our promised efforts. Peoples’ responses to the withdrawal seem to depend largely on whether they believe that global warming will prove catastrophic. Warming due to greenhouse gases is not really in doubt; relevant questions involve how much warming will occur, the impacts of warming, and the viability of climate engineering to avoid or reverse warming. Despite the invective hurled at President Trump, the Paris Accord would have done very little to prevent catastrophic global warming. If every nation had delivered as promised (a big if), the Accord would have prevented about 0.2 degrees Celsius warming by 2100 according to leading climate models. The math of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations is pretty clear: achieving the recommended targets will take a lot more than driving electric cars. Basically, we would need to stop using fossil fuels by mid-century, bringing almost unimaginable changes to our economy and lives. On the other hand, people who don’t see global warming as a dire threat look forward to Mr. Trump soon voiding the Clean Power Plan. Such a celebration might be premature. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) might be committed to the Plan despite the Paris exit. Why? In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. E.P.A. that the Clean Air Act provided legal authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, if the EPA determined that greenhouse gases endangered the environment. In 2009, President Obama’s EPA issued this endangerment finding. As Cato Institute’s Patrick Michaels argued at the recent 12th International Conference on Climate Change, the endangerment finding likely compels implementation of the Clean Power Plan. The process behind imposing these policies is, I think, highly troubling. A lawsuit by environmental groups and sympathetic state attorneys general yielded the 2007 Supreme Court decision. Regulatory actions by the EPA produced the endangerment finding and Clean Power Plan. And finally, we had an international agreement never ratified by the Senate. The process further relied on technicalities and a limitation of the Clean Air Act. The Act requires reduction of pollution to safe levels regardless of cost, and without considering whether we might more easily live with pollution. And yet adaption to a warmer climate is a potential response to global warming. The Clean Air Act gives the EPA authority to regulate “any air pollutant” endangering human well-being. Calling carbon dioxide, which is necessary for life, pollution stretches the plain meaning of the word. Limited government undertakes only those tasks citizens authorize. Meaningful limits require narrowly authorized tasks. Air pollution caused by cars and factories differs markedly from global warming. Action to address global warming should require explicit authorization by citizens. The cap-and-trade proposal of 2010 sought such approval, but failed in the Senate. The Paris Accord was never submitted to the Senate. Enacting the costliest environmental program ever contemplated without approval by our elected representatives is inconsistent with democracy and limited government. Global warming activists interpreted cap-and-trade’s failure as evidence of special interests choking the democratic process. Yet evidence weighs against this interpretation. A 2015 Gallup poll, for instance, found that only 32 percent of Americans worried a great deal about climate change, the same percentage as in 1989. If you doubt such polls, then ask if you or people you know would be willing to give up cars, airplanes, air conditioning and computers over global warming. Our system trusts that Americans have the intelligence and character to determine what is in our best interests. Many Americans are not willing to spend trillions of dollars combatting global warming. We may be wrong, but imposing incredibly costly policies against our wishes is un-American. ••• Daniel Sutter is the Charles G. Koch Professor of Economics with the Manuel H. Johnson Center for Political Economy at Troy University and host of Econversations on TrojanVision. The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Troy University.
Donald Trump takes aim at Dodd-Frank financial overhaul
The Latest on President Donald Trump (all times local): 1:28 p.m. President Donald Trump has signed an executive order that will direct the Treasury secretary to review the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial overhaul. It’s Trump’s first step at scaling back regulations on financial services. Trump has called the law a “disaster” and said it failed to address some of the causes of the 2008-2009 financial crisis. The president has also signed a presidential memorandum related to retirement planning. The administration’s move will delay implementing an Obama-era rule that requires financial professionals who charge commissions to put their clients’ best interests first when giving advice on retirement investments. ___ 1 p.m. The Trump administration says it has thawed its temporary freeze on contract and grant approvals at the Environmental Protection Agency, with all $3.9 billion in planned spending moving forward. A media blackout at the agency also appears to have been partially lifted, as a trickle of press releases were issued by EPA this week. However, the agency still has not posted to its official Twitter feed since President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 inauguration. The Associated Press and other media outlets reported last week that Trump political appointees had instructed EPA staff not to issue press releases or make posts to the agency’s official social media accounts without prior approval. Contract and grant spending at the agency was also put on hold, prompting confusion and concern among state agencies expecting funding. ___ 12:05 p.m. Foreign leaders and groups are finding new ways to make known their disagreement with President Donald Trump’s policies. An international school in Bosnia announced Friday it would extend scholarships to students affected by Trump’s travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries. The United World College’s branch in Mostar said it was motivated by its belief in equal opportunities. In Portugal, the parliament there voted to condemn the U.S. travel ban and highlighted the role of the U.S. to promote tolerance and human rights. In Sweden, Deputy Prime Minister Isabella Lovin posted on Facebook a photo of her signing the country’s new climate law while surrounded by seven female members of her staff. Swedish media say it resembles photos of Trump in the Oval office surrounded by male advisers. ___ 10:25 a.m. President Donald Trump is applauding the January jobs report, saying it shows there’s a “great spirit in the country right now.” Trump addressed last month’s job report, which showed the U.S. economy adding 227,000 jobs and the unemployment rate at 4.8 percent. The report also says that more Americans started looking for work, although not all of them found jobs immediately. Trump is joining business leaders and CEOs in the White House and also previewing some of his economic priorities. He says he expects “to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank,” the financial regulations put in place in response to the Great Recession. The president says they’ll be discussing how to bring back jobs, lower taxes and reduce regulations. ___ 8:15 a.m. President Donald Trump says that a “new radical Islamic terrorist” is behind an attack outside the Louvre Museum in Paris. Trump tweeted early Friday that America needs to “get smart,” in light of the incident. He writes, “a new radical Islamic terrorist has just attacked in Louvre Museum in Paris. Tourists were locked down. France on edge again.” A knife-wielding man shouting “Allahu akbar” — “God is Great,” in Arabic — attacked French soldiers on patrol near the museum Friday in what officials described as a suspected terror attack. The soldiers first tried to fight off the attacker and then opened fire, shooting him five times. There were no immediate details about the identity of the suspect. ___ 7:40 a.m. President Donald Trump says reports of his contentious conversation with Australia’s prime minister are “fake news.” In a tweet Friday morning, Trump thanked Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull “for telling the truth about our very civil conversation that FAKE NEWS media lied about. Very nice!” Turnbull told journalists that Trump had agreed to honor a deal to resettle refugees from among around 1,600 asylum seekers. Most are in island camps on the Pacific nations of Nauru and Papua New Guinea. Turnbull also said the U.S.-Australia relationship is strong. Australia has refused to accept them and instead pays for them to be housed on the impoverished islands. Trump earlier took to Twitter to call the agreement with Australia a “dumb deal.” ___ 7:04 a.m. President Donald Trump says movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger “tried hard” to make “Celebrity Apprentice” a success, but has failed. In an early morning Twitter post Friday, the president kept alive a theme he brought up a day earlier during his first appearance at the National Prayer Breakfast. Trump, who once hosted the NBC reality TV show, took a pot shot there at Schwarzenegger, the current host and former California governor, over a ratings nosedive for the show. On Friday, Trump said in his tweet, “Yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger did a really bad job as Governor of California and even worse on the Apprentice … but at least he tried hard!” Schwarzenegger responded quickly to Thursday’s remarks in a video on his verified Twitter account, suggesting that he and Trump switch jobs. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton seek to grab leadership mantle after Paris
In a presidential campaign that has suddenly shifted in focus to terrorism and security, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican Jeb Bush both see opportunities to cast themselves as best prepared to be commander in chief in tumultuous times. In back-to-back foreign policy speeches this week, Clinton and Bush outlined blueprints for defeating the Islamic State, the extremist group blamed for last week’s attacks in Paris that killed 129 and left hundreds more wounded. While some of the details differed, most notably on the role of U.S. ground forces, the plans of both candidates are grounded in a belief the next president must be more aggressive than the current one in order to defeat the Islamic State group. “It is time for American leadership again,” Bush said Wednesday in remarks from The Citadel. Clinton echoed that sentiment one day later, declaring: “This is a time for American leadership.” Bush and Clinton’s dueling speeches were a reminder of a time when the 2016 general election seemed destined to be a contest between members of two prominent American political families seeking a return to the White House. Clinton’s campaign has so far proceeded largely according to plan. After spending the summer struggling with questions about her use of a private email account and server while secretary of state, she has steadied her campaign and appears to be in strong position to fend off a challenge from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent seeking the Democratic nomination. Bush’s bid for the Republican nomination, however, has so far been a stunning disappointment to many of his supporters. While the former Florida governor raised eye-popping sums of money for his super PAC, he’s struggled to connect with voters and gain traction in a crowded GOP field dominated to date by political novices Donald Trump and Ben Carson. Bush backers have long predicted — and more recently, nervously hoped — that as voting draws closer, Republican voters would begin evaluating candidates less on their visceral appeal and more on competency and policy expertise. Bush’s speech at The Citadel had been planned for weeks, but the Paris attacks gave him an opportunity to remind voters that the next president will quickly confront vexing problems. “If these attacks remind us of anything, it is that we are living in serious times that require serious leadership and that the free world needs to act,” Bush said. He advocated bolstering the U.S. military’s presence on the ground in Syria and Iraq, but didn’t say how many troops he envisioned sending into the chaotic region, nor did he outline what functions they would carry out. Bush’s remarks were generally well-received by Republicans, though there was little sense that they marked a turning point for his struggling candidacy. “What he said was fine,” said former Sen. Jim Talent, a Republican from Missouri who has advised GOP presidential candidates on foreign policy. “I don’t know that it breaks him out of the pack through.” Clinton’s remarks Thursday served as a reminder of her fluency on international issues, cultivated in part during her four years as President Barack Obama‘s secretary of state. Her biggest risk comes from being associated with Obama’s foreign policy, given that polls show the public is increasingly pessimistic about the president’s handling of world affairs. While Clinton has been careful to avoid criticizing Obama’s approach to the Middle East, she emphasized in her remarks the ways she would tackle the situation differently, including setting up a no-fly zone over Syria. Bush, too, supports a no-fly zone, as well as the creation of “safe zones” to offer protection to Syrians. Bush and Clinton were also in agreement in their calls for arming the Kurds, one of the most effective fighting forces in the region, and bolstering the involvement of Arab partners. “They’re both part of a broader political consensus that seems to have developed over the course of the campaign that the U.S. needs to do more,” said Nick Heras, a Middle East researcher at the Center for New American Security, a Washington-based think tank. The candidates’ starkest difference came on the issue of sending American ground troops into Iraq and Syria to directly fight the extremists. While Bush said that step was imperative, Clinton said she would resist deploying ground forces even if the U.S. were directly attacked. Asked whether it would really be possible to resist calls for such action in the wake of a terror attack on U.S. soil, Clinton conceded there would be enormous pressure. But, she added, “I think it would be a mistake.” Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Jeb Bush calls for U.S. ground forces to fight Islamic State
Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush on Wednesday called for the U.S. to send more troops to the Middle East to fight the Islamic State. “This is the war of our time,” the former Florida governor said at the Citadel five days after Islamic State militants attacked Paris and killed 129 people. “Radical Islamic terrorists have declared war on the western world. Their aim is our total destruction. We can’t withdraw from this threat, or negotiate with it. We have but once choice: to defeat it.” Bush had planned for weeks to deliver a speech about Pentagon and military purchasing reform at the prestigious South Carolina military college. But the horrific events in France Friday moved Bush, who has supported the potential deployment of troops in Iraq and Syria, to call for ground troops. “The United States, in conjunction with our NATO allies and more Arab partners, will need to increase our presence on the ground,” he added, calling air power insufficient. He offered no specifics, but said the number of Americans sent to the region should be “in line with what our military generals recommend, not politicians.” The speech came as European nations hunted for conspirators in the attack and amid a fierce political debate within the U.S. over whether to limit or halt the resettlement of refugees fleeing war-ravaged Syria. One of the Paris bombers was thought to have arrived in a wave of migrants surging toward the West, but a top German official later said the Syrian passport found at a Paris attack scene was likely a fake. Bush, the brother and son of presidents, has projected himself as a potential commander in chief able to handle such challenges. But his focus on national security has increased as his own campaign for the presidential nomination has struggled to gain traction and especially since the Paris attacks. “The brutal savagery is a reminder of what is at stake in this election,” Bush said. “We are choosing the leader of the free world. And if these attacks remind us of anything, it’s that we are living in serious times that require serious leadership.” It’s no mystery why Bush made the speech in South Carolina. Many of the Republican primary voters in the early-voting Southern primary state are retired and active-duty military. Bush is not the only Republican presidential candidate who supports sending ground troops to fight the Islamic State. South Carolina’s own senior Sen. Lindsey Graham has been an aggressive advocate. Ohio Gov. John Kasich has also suggested sending U.S. troops. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio was generally supportive of President Obama‘s decision to put 50 special operations troops in Syria, and has suggested the number ought to grow. However, he hasn’t called for a larger scale mobilization. Bush has long faulted President Barack Obama’s administration, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — the leading Democratic presidential candidate — for allowing wholesale federal spending cuts prompted by the 2013 budget reconciliation after Congress and the president were unable to craft more strategic cuts. The cuts affected military and non-military spending alike, at a time when conflicts in Syria and Iraq “spiraled out of control as President Obama and Hillary Clinton failed to act,” Bush said. And while Bush has often referred to the Islamic State as an unconventional threat, his prescription for the military includes heavier spending on its conventional elements. He called for doubling the U.S. Marine Corps’ battle-ready strength to 186,000, and updating the U.S. nuclear weapons capacity. He also called for increasing production of next-generation stealth bombers. Such aircraft, such as the F-35 joint strike fighter, carry a price tag of roughly $150 million apiece. Bush did not specifically propose a way to pay for the buildup. Bush, a year ago viewed as the likely front-runner, has failed to move to the top tier of GOP White House hopefuls in a field where political outsiders Donald Trump and Ben Carson and charismatic young lawmakers Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz have eclipsed him. While Bush projected himself as a potential wartime commander in South Carolina, he also appeared on Tuesday to be anticipating criticism that he would wage war in the Middle East, as his father and brother did when they were president. Bush’s brother, George W. Bush, left office with low approval in part due to his handling of the 2003 invasion of the war in Iraq, and its aftermath. “I think it’s important for the next president, whoever he or she may be, to learn from the lessons of the past and use those lessons to focus on the future,” Bush told an audience of more than 300 at Coastal Carolina University in Conway Tuesday. On Thursday in New York, Clinton will deliver an address outlining her strategy for defeating ISIS as well as her overall plan for fighting radical jihadism. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Bernie Sanders has most to prove as Democrats gather for 2nd debate
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders faces the biggest test yet of his insurgent presidential campaign on Saturday night, when he faces off with Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton in the party’s second primary debate. His goal is clear: Reset a contest that increasingly looks like little more than a march to the nomination for Clinton. That effort will be complicated by fresh terrorist strikes that have captured the world’s attention. Despite Sanders’ focus on domestic issues, national security and foreign policy will play prominent roles in the debate, with the string of deadly attacks in Paris that killed more than 120 people front and center. All the candidates quickly denounced the attacks in statements on Friday night. Party officials said the forum will continue as planned. Foreign relations is an area where Clinton, a former secretary of state, is in the strongest position to talk about the attacks and the U.S. effort to dismantle the Islamic State group. But her tenure is tied to that of Obama, who’s struggled to contain the threat from Islamic militants in Syria and associated terror attacks across the globe. Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, accompanied her to Des Moines on Saturday but will not be in the hall for the debate, spokesman Angel Urena said. A spate of good news for Clinton since the party’s first debate a month ago has helped her rebuild a lead in the early voting states, an uptick that comes amid other signs the party is coalescing behind her. An Associated Press survey of superdelegates published Friday found that half of the Democratic insiders are publicly backing Clinton. Sanders may have inadvertently facilitated some of her progress in the first debate, when he seemed to dismiss the controversy over her use of a private email account and server by saying Americans are tired of hearing about her “damn emails.” Since then, he’s given her no more passes. Though careful never to mention Clinton by name, Sanders has drawn a series of contrasts with the former secretary of state on issues that include her backing of the war in Iraq, trade and the minimum wage. Sanders’ advisers say he plans to discuss the email issue only if the moderators of the debate in Des Moines, Iowa, bring it up. That could be a signal to organizers that he’s is open to the topic. “He’s definitely going to cut a harder contrast on core issues,” said Larry Cohen, a senior adviser to Sanders. “But it’s not going to be over personal style.” The problem for Sanders is that Clinton agrees with him on some of the core domestic issues of his campaign, having shifted to the left in recent weeks to oppose construction of the Keystone XL pipeline and the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. “It’s really tough for him,” said Gina Glantz, manager of Bill Bradley‘s 2000 presidential campaign, which posed a primary challenge to then-Vice President Al Gore. “He’s in a difficult position where his current arguments aren’t enough to get beyond his core voter.” While Sanders aides bragged about their candidate’s lax preparation for the last debate, they shuttled him to his campaign headquarters in Burlington, Vermont, for mock sessions before this match-up. Clinton, too, has kept her schedule relatively clear over the last several days, leaving plenty of time for rehearsals. “They are absolutely prepared for the fact that Bernie’s going to come out swinging,” said Maria Cardona, a Democratic strategist who worked for Clinton’s failed 2008 White House campaign. “The question is how it’s going to happen.” Clinton supporters say their candidate will remain focused on laying out her vision for the future rather than striking back at Sanders. Her campaign has about $15.2 million in television advertising planned through mid-February, compared with a $3.2 million Sanders ad buy that ends next week, according to Kantar Media’s CMAG advertising tracker. The Service Employees International Union, an influential force in Democratic politics, is expected to issue their endorsement on Tuesday, according to people knowledgeable about the union’s process. Clinton has been backed by more than 72 percent of members in all their internal polling, including the most recent survey conducted a few weeks ago. Her team is hoping to notch another win after a series of strong moments since the first debate. Clinton has benefited from Vice President Joe Biden‘s decision to forgo a run and well-received testimony before a Republican-led congressional panel investigating the deadly 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya. They’re also trying not to alienate the Sanders backers whose support they’ll need should Clinton win the nomination. “As a front-runner your job is to do no harm,” said Cardona. “She’s going to want to be a comfortable home for the Bernie supporters toward the end of this process.” Sanders, too, may face tougher attacks. Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, who’s struggled to break 5 percent in national preference polls, has questioned Sanders’ commitment to the Democratic Party and President Barack Obama, still a popular figure among Democrats. A more aggressive tone would mark a shift for a race that has so far been notable for its civility. Democrats have spent months boasting about the substantive tone of their contest, attempting to set-up a favorable early contrast with the often carnival-like insults of the crowded Republican primary. Their bragging may come to an end after Saturday night. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Expressions of solidarity for France in red, white and blue
Social media was awash Saturday in the red, white and blue of the French flag as people worldwide expressed their solidarity with a nation in mourning in the aftermath of the terror attacks in Paris. Users of Facebook shaded their profile pictures in the French Tricolor, and on Twitter and Instagram, people posted vacation photos, teardrops and a peace symbol with the Eiffel Tower inscribed in the center as they expressed their grief over the carnage. People also harnessed the power of social media in the search for their missing loved ones as Parisians desperate to get in touch with family and friends missing since Friday’s wave of gun and bomb attacks posted heart-breaking messages and photos under the hashtag #rechercheparis — Paris Search. Scores remain unaccounted for in the aftermath of the coordinated attacks on a rock concert, a soccer stadium, bars, restaurants and other popular nightspots that killed at least 129 people. “Waleed is missing,” read one post. “We last contacted him at the match, Please share & contact me if u have any info. #rechercheParis.” “I’ve been looking for my cousin since last night,” read another. “He’s 25 and 1m75. He’s called Younes. #rechercheParis.” The photos and messages garnered hundreds of retweets from users eager to help in the search for survivors. Across the globe, people joined in to offer sympathy and share a nation’s pain. Many posted the poignant video of the Eiffel Tower — the beacon of the City of Light — going to black in memory of the dead. Some of the world’s most recognizable buildings and monuments — the Sydney Opera House, the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio, One World Trade Center in New York, the Mexican Senate — were shaded in the colors of the French flag. Sports teams also expressed their solidarity. The Washington Capitals splashed the red, white and blue of the Tricolor across the team’s ice rink before Friday night’s game against the Calgary Flames. “The National Anthem is playing, but tonight our thoughts are with Paris,” a caption on the Capitals Twitter feed read. The images and sentiment, shared under the hashtags #prayforparis or #parisattacks, mirrored the outpouring of emotion that followed the Charlie Hebdo attacks 10 months ago. One of the most shared was a peace symbol by Jean Jullien, a French graphic designer living in London, that showed a stark image of the Eiffel Tower rising in the center of a peace sign. Jullien said the design came to him by simple association of Paris and peace. “I was overwhelmed that so many people used it,” he said in an e-mail to the Associated Press. “It’s a communication tool for people to share their solidarity. It’s a message for peace.” Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Jeb Bush on Paris terror attack: This is the war of our time
In a pre-scheduled interview tapes with Salem Radio talk-show host Hugh Hewitt shortly after the news was breaking on the terrorist attacks in Paris, Jeb Bush said it’s time for America to lead and called the war on Islamic terrorist “the war on our time.” “No, I’m not surprised,” Bush told Hewitt when asked about his initial reaction, which has now led to 127 deaths from six separate attacks on Friday night. “This is a war being created by Islamic terrorists. it’s not a law enforcement operation and the mindset that in our country at least needs to change to recognize it for what it is. This is an organized effort to destroy Western Civilization. And we need to lead in this regard, we need to re-garner the alliances, fortify those alliances, reconnect with our counterintelligence, and intelligence capabilities with our European allies and engage in the Middle East to take out ISIS, which is more likely to be the wellspring of this type of activity. If it’s not them, there are other terrorist groups. This is the war of our time and we have to be serious in engaging and creating a strategy to confront it and take it out.” French President Francois Hollande said this morning that it was ISIS who was responsible to the attacks.
