Bastille Day

by Glenn Fairman7/14/16

There comes a time when your effeminate memorials of balloons and votive candles serve only to crystallize in the minds of villains your acquiescence to exist as prey. When the stench of lumbering suicide crowds the heavens along with the bleating of your sheep-like sorrows, perhaps you will awaken from your morphine sleep; learning again the wisdom of cause and effect, and be healed.
bastille day

Glenn Fairman writes from Highland, Ca.
About Author  Author Archive  Email

Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (1518 views)

Glenn Fairman

About Glenn Fairman

This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Bastille Day

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    Well, the truck driver terrorist (latest report is he has a Tunisian background) is dead (and good riddance), but since he undoubtedly intended to die, this means nothing. A least 77 French are dead for a single Muslim jihadist. That’s a very poor rate of exchange. We need to retaliate against jihadist states (such as Iran, ISIS, Hamas, and Hezbollah) using devastating force. How does obliterating Gaza sound? As the scapegrace nephew suggests of Hill House at the end of The Haunting, after burning it down we should sow it with salt — as the Romans did to Carthage.

    • Rosalys says:

      I would start with bombing Mecca. Drop leaflets first letting the populace know that they have 24 hours to leave. After that, ka-boom!

  2. Steve Lancaster says:

    Give me 3 divisions of Marines an air wing and limited ROE and I will make the ME howl!

  3. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    As any thinking person knows, the jihadis are at war with the West. In their minds, whatever the West does, the jihadis win.

    If the West does nothing, as it has to date, the jihadis win because they are able to slaughter the sheep as the flock stands by chewing grass. If a sheep or two are killed all the flock does is flit a few yards away from the bloodshed and resume eating.

    If the West retaliates massively, then the jihadis will have brought about their desired war between the West and Islam.

    In either case, the jihadi gets his 77 virgins.

    Given the above, the jihadis are not going to stop. Does the West have the stomach for the war which will be required to crush the jihadis? I don’t think so.

    Welcome to the new normal.

  4. Rosalys says:

    “We are in a new era and France has to live with terrorism. We have to show solidarity and show our calm…. The only response is one of dignity and responsibility.”
    – French Prime Minister Manuel Valls

    My God! What is it going to take!

    I’ve always been repulsed by candle lit vigils and memorial piles of teddy bears and flowers. This wringing of hands, “woe is me!” attitude, and tears (except in the case of family and friends) over these “tragedies” are pointless, and ridiculous. The proper response is outrage and overwhelming retaliation.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      There is a place for tears at the beginning of the reaction to such an atrocity. But then comes the time for a response, and “Thank you, sir, may I please have another?” is not a suitable response. Yours is more like it.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Yes, the candlelight vigils are so emasculating. But it’s about as proactive as the kumbaya multiculturalist crowd can be. They can’t get mad (that would be a hate crime). They can’t actually do anything but sit around and make a big show of how damn much they supposedly care — after the fact, of course. They don’t care enough to do what needs to be done to prevent things like this from happening. They’re more than happy to continue to pay the Terrorist Death Tax. And if innocents weren’t involved, I would be fine with that.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Oh, they can do something — they can try to get rid of guns. Note that the Nice jihadist had guns in his truck, and some reports say he got out and started shooting. Yet France, like most of Europe, has the sort of gun control liberals want.

  5. GHG says:

    Sheep are led to the slaughter. They’re led by those, like the French Prime Minister, who are insulated from the random and wanton violence visited upon people just trying to live their lives. High minded platitudes are easy from an ivory tower but only perpetuate the slaughter of the innocents.

    What isn’t being focused on is that the terrorism perpetrated by Islamic zealots serves the ends of elitist cabals because it drives the necessity of the police state required by the elites to achieve their ultimate objective of subjugation of the West. The same “game” is being played out in the US with the war against police. The solution to the chaos will be storm troopers. It’s the very essence behind disarming the US – turning armed individuals into a herd of sheep.

  6. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Yours truly has consistently said that Islam is evil. Here’s a quote from an article (with comment) that Glenn linked to on Facebook that gets right to the point:

    Why pretend that they are “Islamic state supporters”? They don’t have to be ISIS supporters. They are Koran supporters where jihad and slaughter of infidels is a required norm for every Muslim to commit, whether they do so in a group or by themselves. Islam in itself is built on terrorism. It grew from terrorism. It expanded around the world from terrorism. And it gained over 1.5 billion followers by terrorizing the people making them fear their safety and peace, thus converting out of fear and submission. All Muslims are the future generations of infidel ancestors who were victims of Muslim terrorism of the medieval times. They converted out of fear.

    All this nonsense to attribute terrorism only to ISIS, al-Qaeda, Taliban or one of the hundreds of Muslim terror groups around the world is absurd.

  7. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Who could suppose that rape could be so useful? It might be the only thing to snap Europe out of apologizing for it’s Islamic heathens who are desecrating their civilization. Here’s an article that talks about France being on the verge of civil war.

    He also said he is ‘convinced’ that Islamic State will change its tactics in France, and increase its firepower, which until now has mainly relied on outdated AK-47 rifles and suicide belts.
    He said he feared a move towards car bombs and more conventional explosive devices, allowing terrorists to attack without risking their own lives, and that he believed Islamist extremists will look to use booby-trapped cars in the future.

    He said: ‘I’m convinced they’ll go to booby-trapped vehicles and bombs, thus upping their power.
    ‘We know very well they’re going to use this mode of operating.

    ‘They’re going to end up sending commandos whose mission is to organise terrorist campaigns without necessarily going to the assault with death awaiting them.’

    He also raised the possibility of extremists using ‘dirty bombs’ and the natural poison ricin, saying several radical groups had studied the toxin in the past.

    With such a vapid response from authorities, why wouldn’t the dogs of Islam ramp up their violence and means of violence? For me it’s only a betting-odds question as to whether a mushroom cloud appears first over Paris, London, or Berlin. In the meantime, have fun with the car bombs and other mayhem. You would think this state-of-affairs has to be killing the tourist trade for Europe. I mean, I sure as hell wouldn’t go to France now.

  8. fred backer says:

    Ostracize all Muslims , ban all Muslims from Western Society , shutter all Mosques . Require an Islamic Reformation that ends Theocracy , Sharia Law , Hadith and separates Islam from politics , Imams from government and raises Islam from its 7th Century barbarity as the price of being admitted into the 21st Century . Promote education for all Muslims free from Mosques and Imams and restore Muslim Women to their proper and full status . End the Islamic practice of Taqiyya ( deception , lies ) to protect Islam as this more than anything has led to the necessity of banishment of all Muslims .

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      And one can be justified in doing so because Islam is not a religion. It is a totalitarian political program. They banned Nazis in Germany but they can’t seem to do the same thing to their first cousins.

    • Steve Lancaster says:

      In November we will set the stage for a rollback but the reality is that unscrewing this charlie foxtrot will require violence, treasure, and time. BO has had 8 years to get it to this point don’t expect miracles from the Trump administration

  9. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    The link below is to an article which explains what is really happening with terrorism in Europe (and I would add America). It then gives a good example of how it should be dealt with, i.e. it gives a plausible solution. The solution may not be pretty, but it is better than nuking Mecca and Medina, which would cause more trouble than they are worth.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I agree that using deportation as a weapon is a good one. But as far as I’m concerned, the official oath of office should include the words, “…and Islam is incompatible with Western freedom.”

      It is not exactly news (Indians…dots not feathers…knew this) that when Muslims reach a certain percentage of the population, they become dangerous and unwieldy. Only when they are in small numbers do Muslims feel the need to fit in. Think of it like a virus that invades your body. In small doses, your body can handle it.

      But things are far worse than mere quantity of virus. We’re actually calling the virus a good thing thereby eradicating our civilizational immune system. Muslims are only good to the extent they are in a severe minority and thus are forced to play by our rules. All those supposedly good and moderate Muslims will cave in an instant if and when the more Jihadist arm gains a foothold because of numbers and other factors.

      So I read an article such as this, Mr. Kung, with a grain of salt. It’s better than most but still not in the business of frank truth-telling. But the author expresses a truth about Islam, whether he knows past history or not: Unless you push back against them, they’re going to get pushy and violent. Yes, of course, we should use the threat of deportation to get at the “bad” Muslims.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        So I read an article such as this, Mr. Kung, with a grain of salt. It’s better than most but still not in the business of frank truth-telling.

        After living twenty years in Asia, I learned that truth is a dangerous thing.

    • Rosalys says:

      I disagree. I think destroying Mecca and Medina is a fine idea. Just why would doing so cause more trouble than it’s worth?

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Attacking Mecca or Medina could turn the entire Muslim world actively against us. That would be very undesirable, particularly regarding those Muslim countries in which jihadism is especially weak (e.g., Indonesia).

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          That’s making the assumption that most of the Muslim world isn’t already against us.

          And I’m still trying to figure out why Muslims can murder, murder, and continue to murder and yet the Western world isn’t turned against them. Isn’t our real job (however this is achieved) to turn the Western world against Jihad and to hell with whatever Muslims think of us?

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            That’s making the assumption that most of the Muslim world isn’t already against us.

            No one’s making that assumption. But there is a biiiiigggg difference between most of the Muslim world being against us and ALL OF THE MUSLIM WORLD BEING ACTIVELY CALLED OUT TO AND FOLLOWING JIHAD AGAINST THE USA!!!!

            Anyone who doesn’t get this is living in Never-Neverland.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              Basically, Mr. Kung, the running meme regarding fighting back against Jihad is that fighting them only creates more of them. This idea has acted to disarm or denude our response to our enemies.

              Those who don’t understand what Islam is can always point to a “moderate” bunch of Muslims somewhere not actively engaged in Jihad (the people Mark Steyn says just can’t be bothered with putting on a bomb vest).

              Most of the Muslim world is against us. Perhaps not all of them, or even most of them, want to kill us. But most are against us. That is the nature of Islam. It is a supremacist ideology. You should know that.

              • Timothy Lane says:

                I agree that we must retaliate against the jihadists, but the problem with Mecca and Medina is that they’re the holiest cities in the Muslim world. Also, Saudi Arabia is — sort of — on our side. I favor massive retaliation; I just don’t think the holiest sites are the best choices — much as the US held off bombing Kyoto during World War II, though they were ready to do so if they thought it was necessary. So Mecca and Medina should be among the last targets, not the first.

              • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

                Who is talking about a meme? I certainly am not. And I am not talking about not fighting them. As a matter of fact, the article I linked to talked about ways to fight them.

                Unlike anyone else on this blog, (except for perhaps Steve) I have lived and traveled extensively in Muslim countries. And I cannot say whether or not most Muslims are against us. Perhaps they are, but frankly, I don’t give a damn if the bumi in a kampong in Indonesia planting his rice, is against us or not. He is generally not interested in us or what we do. The same goes for the bumi in Malaysia, the Muslim in South Thailand or Southern Burma. The Indian Muslim is presently more concerned with his masala tea than with figuring out how to attack America.

                This will all change should we be insane enough to bomb Mecca and Medina.

                Our leaders may not be fulfilling their obligations to protect us. But thank God that obligation is not in the hands of some who think bombing Mecca is the answer. No ability to think ahead or complete disregard for possible consequences.

              • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

                Remember, Mr. Kung, everything I say is in the context of Europe dying because of naive views regarding Islam.

                If New York was nuked by Jihadists, I’d unequivocally be for nuking Mecca and/or Medina. To do otherwise would be virtual surrender.

                We can go back and forth all day playing the “nice Muslim/bad Muslim” game. And if you can cut the head off of this dragon leaving nice bumi in kampong planting rice and no more, please outline your foreign policy.

                Seriously. George Bush couldn’t do it with his “religion of peace” and nation-building shtick. The only policy I know that has any chance of working is that if they hit you, you have to hit them back twice as hard. That’s the only way to keep the rice-growers growing rice instead of Jihad.

            • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

              Europe is dying because it was too decadent to work for a living and produce offspring.

              Europe could have avoided the basic problem by restricting immigration, but as I said it was too decadent.

              Europe could still theoretically take control of the situation if it would do some of the things which are recommended in the article I linked to. But it is doubtful Europe will do the things necessary.

              This being the case, what is all the talk about nuking Mecca about? If a civilization will not do some of the basic things necessary to survive, how is blowing up the world going to help? In fact, if Europe and America started showing some resolve then blowing up Mecca would not be necessary.

              One does not go from A to Z without trying some of the letters in between.

              As to retaliating to a nuked NYC or D.C., again, we could already do quite a lot to avoid that scenario. How about tightening up our borders and requiring visas again? We did quite well with that system which only loosened up in the middle to late 1980’s. Even my wife, who was a Singaporean citizen, was required to obtain a visa to visit the USA.

              Such a requirement would be pretty effective and is very short of of nuking Mecca.

              Everyone talks about a lot of things in very broad brush terms, but much could be done without bringing about a world war. The problem is we are being screwed by our elites. Many of the insane and unconstitutional powers given to the government by the Patriot Act are not really doing so much to protect us as to control us. If we had a handle on our immigration policy and borders, we would be in much less danger. But as I have said before, Saudi i.e. fundamentalist Wahhabi money has gone a long way to corrupting our political system. I am sure the Bush’s are hand-in-glove with the Saudis as are many others who walk the corridors of power.

              As to jihadists nuking NYC and/or DC, I would want to have an idea if they were Sunni or Shia. I would then bomb the Middle East accordingly.

              But I would also wonder if I should send someone a thank you note for getting rid of the scoundrels who rule us. (OK I’m not really being 100% serious, just 70%)

              • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

                It could come to nuking (or at least carpet bombing) Mecca, although I agree with Timothy’s opinion that these sites are perhaps best left for last…but a strong retaliation is indeed in order.

                I see no way out of Europe’s demographic problem other than a benevolent Hitler. They could chip away at it with various techniques, including the one you mentioned. But Islam is incompatible with Western (and Leftist) ways of life. That people are blinded to this fact because of naive multiculturalist views and hatred of the West doesn’t change that fact.

                A sane immigration policy regarding Islam would have a target percentage of the population as a factor. Muslims should never be allowed to be more than about 1 percent of the population or you’re heading for trouble.

                As you said, “Does the West have the stomach for the war which will be required to crush the jihadis? I don’t think so.” I couldn’t agree more. Right now, we don’t have the stomach for it. We will continue to pay the Terrorist Death Tax. And I have no idea when that tax becomes too high for people to want to pay.

              • Timothy Lane says:

                That 1% limit, ideally, would probably apply not just to the country as a whole, but to individual communities. Perhaps the local percentage could be a bit higher, but not by much. Large Muslim immigrant groups, such as the Somalis in St. Paul, are very dangerous.

        • Rosalys says:

          Attacking Mecca or Medina would separate the wheat from the chaff, the true believers from the “I’m a Muslim, because if I decide not to be a Muslim I will be beheaded” ones. Then we can proceed to do what needs to be done without worrying about harming the “peaceful” “Muslims.”

          I’m not suggesting that we go out tomorrow and bomb, bomb, bomb! I’m just saying that it can’t be taken off the table. Muslims have tried – and often succeeded – to destroy churches, temples, and historic art, architecture, and artifacts; plus our World Trade Center, Pentagon, and a nice patch of Pennsylvania countryside, where there is now a crater, but was probably meant for the White House or Congress. But, no-o-o-o-o. We mustn’t touch precious-s-s Kaaba, or Great Mosque, or any other mosque.

          How about an ultimatum. “One more terror attack on our soil and within 24 hours say goodbye to Mecca!” And when they get riled up and do it again, there goes Medina. Their holy/hellish sites obliterated, we continue until they surrender or are destroyed. They mean to destroy us and they will not stop until they are made to. There is no room for measured response. Measured response tells them that they need only back off for a while to regroup.

          I think it was Allen West who said, “They don’t think like us.” and he’s right! An informative read:

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            You make a good case, Rosalys.

            I think that article has a lot of wisdom in it. And yet you see the core conceit that has allowed Muslims to infiltrate to the extent they have. These Leftists have noting but sugarplum visions of their own motives and beliefs:

            I was born into a Leftist family, and the values that I grew up with – the equality of women, a critical view on the dangerous power of religion, and the freedom for the little guy to speak freely – I consider basic values of the Left.

            Yes, atheism has been such a humanizing force for humanity, and thank God (or Darwin, I suppose) for the oppressive speech codes everywhere due to the Left that have done much to marginalize the “little guy.” And anyone who doesn’t understand the destructive force of feminism in marginalizing men (with “equality” not being the goal, but man-hating) is just smoking dope. Still, this guy is no useful idiot at least where Islam is concerned. Apparently.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            Interesting article, providing a compelling argument for banning Muslim immigration into Western civilization.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        This would cause a full-scale, worldwide religious war. Perhaps this would be acceptable to you, but I sure don’t want it to happen.

        Let’s see, Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the military, especially the intelligence side, is very Islamic. Some of these weapons would be aimed at, and very possibly launched at India which also has nuclear weapons.

        There would be huge instability in Asia because India would then become very concerned about Pakistan’s ally and India’s natural adversary, China. Who knows what Bangladesh would do, but being a Muslim country it would no doubt add to the troubles. I will not say anything about Iran except we have given them our approval to produce a nuclear weapon and that will also complicate things.

        Southeast Asia would become a hotbed of trouble because Indonesia and Malaysia are majority Muslim countries. Singapore, Thailand and Burma have a large Muslim minorities.

        All oil supplies from the Middle East and possibly Indonesia would likely stop. Of course this would hurt the producing countries but it would kill the economies of the rest of the world. How many millions would die just because of that?

        North African oil and gas would be cut off and all of North Africa would be up in arms against Europe.

        Europe and America have millions of Muslims within their borders. Do you think these people would sit still?

        But nothing would happen in Antarctica.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          This would cause a full-scale, worldwide religious war. Perhaps this would be acceptable to you, but I sure don’t want it to happen.

          And that full-scale, worldwide religious war would look different how?

          I guess, Mr. Kung, you haven’t got what it takes either to generalship a war against Jihad. There is no solution but the eradication of Islam. Yeah, it sucks that Pakistan has nukes. But it’s either us or them in the long run. Islam is at war with us now and many countries such as Pakistan support this war. George Bush had the right approach in one regard when he told these types of countries: You’re either with us or your with the terrorists.

          At some point we’re just going to have to rip the band-aid off. We have plenty of oil, coal, and natural gas. We can do without Middle East oil. We should right now be building toward total independence of Middle East oil.

          Europe right now is doomed demographically to become Eurabia. Whether we acknowledge we are in a war or not, we are. It’s either us or them. There is no living together. There never has been.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            But some of them have been with us, and a reform of Islam is not impossible, though it is unlikely. I recently learned that our oldest extant friendship treaty is with the very first country to recognize the new US — the Kingdom of Morocco.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            And that full-scale, worldwide religious war would look different how?

            Are you serious?

            Can you not differentiate between what is now happening and a war which would likely cost tens of millions of lives?

            The Cold War went on for decades and while there were numerous hot proxy conflicts which costs many many lives, the West won without going into WWIII.

            I have no crystal ball so cannot forecast what will happen in the long run. Maybe it will end up Islam against everyone else, but I somehow don’t think it will work out so neatly. Much will depend on how the rest of the world acts now.

            And if you mean that I don’t have the stomach to be responsible for a total war which would lead to the deaths of millions of innocent people, when I believe other possibilities exist to stamp down jihadism, then yes you are correct. I don’t have the stomach.

            You used to say, “up to a point” was a very important concept. What happened?

    • Steve Lancaster says:

      Goldman is mostly correct but in this war, like the last 15 years of the cold war intelligence work is all about misinformation. The Soviets were masters at this and all the info I have indicates that the Russians still are. Soon we are going to have to work with those very same Russians.

  10. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    It appears units of the Turkish military have staged a coup and taken over the rule of Turkey.

    If they succeed, it would probably be an improvement on the Erdogan government which is Islamist and has been undermining modern Turkey for the last decade. The Erdogan people have also been supporting Sunni terrorists in Syria in order to fight the Kurds.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I’ll take Turkey and a side of Atatürk.

    • GHG says:

      I like a commentator saying if Erdogan is using Facetime to say he’s still in control, he’s probably not still in control.

      The military staging the coup has supposedly said they want to restore individual freedoms and democracy … sound good, let’s see what happens.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        I hope they don’t restore so much freedom that types like Erdogan, i.e. Muslim-Brotherhood- by- another-name Turks, are given free rein to try and take over again.

      • Steve Lancaster says:

        I have been saying for the last two years that the real target of Russian involvement in the ME is Turkey. This goes back to the Russo/Georgian war and also explains the continuing violence in Ukraine.

        I look for the Kurds to make some independence moves soon. The Turkish Iranian border is closed. If the coop is successful then Russian influence in the ME will continue to expand.

        Yet another gift from BO, the gifts that keep on giving

      • Timothy Lane says:

        A friend of mine checked out the group they seem to represent in wikipedia, and concluded that in effect Turkey was just taken over (if indeed that’s what happens ultimately) by their equivalent of L. Ron Hubbard. We could be seeing a multi-sided civil war there soon.

  11. GHG says:

    Bombing Islamic holy sites does nothing to solve the problem. Bombing the bad guys even if it means collateral damage I’m OK with because it eliminates some of the bad guys. But it won’t eliminate all of the bad guys and therefore it won’t eliminate the problem. We have to eliminate the enemy that is already inside the gates and stop more from getting in. And we have to stop the Left who enable them.

  12. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    It appears that many of the soldiers involved in the coup are giving up. If the coup does not succeed, you can bet the reprisals are going to be swift and bloody. Erdogan will use this excuse to further his control over the army and promote Islamism.

    Turkey is probably going to go through a bad time.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Undoubtedly. And it will be a far less reliable “ally” than it already is. At best, we can hope that Erdogan and ISIS will be rival caliph wannabes.

    • GHG says:

      Instability is not always a bad thing – maybe the Kurdish people will finally be able to get out from under the yoke.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Not if Erdogan is back in control, probably with more power than ever (e.g., removing 2700 judges, no doubt non-subservient ones to be replaced ultimately by his lackeys). When I thought a Kemalist coup could lead to a multi-party civil war, the Kurds were one of the factions I anticipated.

  13. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    It would appear an eighteen-year-old “German-Iranian” just killed nine people in and around a shopping mall in Munich. He then ran out and shot himself. (At least he saved the public purse unnecessary expenses.)

    The authorities are not yet able to determine the motive behind the act of terror. Some report he was cursing foreigners. Other reports claim he was shouting “Alahu Akkbar”. Any takers on which one of these reports is closer to the truth? Soon the government will claim it was hormones.

  14. Rosalys says:

    The last I heard (granted it was on the “news,” and therefore suspect) they were thinking there may have been three gunmen, one dead, two on the lam. German police were treating it as a terrorist attack, and some believe it may be the work of neo-nazis. Whether one or three, I’m putting my money on Muslims.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Well, the dead shooter has been identified as a “German of Iranian descent”, and presumably a Muslim. It’s theoretically possible there were 2 independent attacks, though I wouldn’t bet on it.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        None of the German papers give many details about the shooter. He holds dual citizenship in Germany and Iran. He has lived over two years in Munich.

        I read some “supposed” transcripts in English of an interchange he had with a couple of people who yelled at him from afar. But it didn’t sound very true to what was actually said as cursing in German is quite different than in English.

        The German government now believes there was only one shooter.

  15. Abdul Raebel says:

    Commemorates the beginning of the French Revolution with the Storming of the Bastille on 14 July 1789,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *