The criminal attack on the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:28 pm

Tude: "The attack on Charlie Hebdo was a planned target. What happened afterwords, murder of a police woman, taking hostage at printing factory and kosher market had no special significance."

The kosher market had special significance.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:32 pm

Nitpick ?

Tell that to the grieving relatives.

Accomplished nothing ?

Worldwide headlines for their cause.

Planned attack on Charlie Hebdo......NOT so random then......and not the actions of nitwits, but fanatics with a cause, real or imagined, right or wrong, people that have to be listened to.

They took a path to martyrdom.........all the more reason to make them suffer the pain of life imprisonment.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:23 pm

AnneBoleyn;1471230 wrote: Tude: "The attack on Charlie Hebdo was a planned target. What happened afterwords, murder of a police woman, taking hostage at printing factory and kosher market had no special significance."

The kosher market had special significance.

I expected my comment about the kosher market not being special would bring comment. My thought at the time, sure, it was a Jewish target, but nothing significant about that market. Murdering Jews for no reason other than they are Jews is nothing new.

With that said, I do take it personal, as I suppose you do.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:33 pm

tude dog;1471240 wrote: I expected my comment about the kosher market not being special would bring comment. My thought at the time, sure, it was a Jewish target, but nothing significant about that market. Murdering Jews for no reason other than they are Jews is nothing new.

With that said, I do take it personal, as I suppose you do.

I take it in a resigned way I guess, as in "Oh, that again, what else is new?"

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:35 pm

tude dog;1471240 wrote: With that said, I do take it personal, as I suppose you do.Is that in any way a similar reaction to Arabs taking personally the trashing of their ancestral homelands, or could you indicate where the difference lies.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:41 pm

FG;1471242 wrote: Is that in any way a similar reaction to Arabs taking personally the trashing of their ancestral homelands, or could you indicate where the difference lies.

Israel is ancestral to the Jewish people: "Next Year in Jerusalem".

What the U.S. did to the native Americans is much worse, not that I'm comparing. It's the way of this world & people only get offended when Jews do it. IMO

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:09 pm

AnneBoleyn;1471243 wrote: Israel is ancestral to the Jewish people: "Next Year in Jerusalem".

What the U.S. did to the native Americans is much worse, not that I'm comparing. It's the way of this world & people only get offended when Jews do it. IMO

I'd have thought the opening post makes it quite clear that I get offended when Britain, France and the US do it.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:11 pm

FG;1471242 wrote: Is that in any way a similar reaction to Arabs taking personally the trashing of their ancestral homelands, or could you indicate where the difference lies.

Whatever that means?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:32 pm

FG;1471248 wrote: I'd have thought the opening post makes it quite clear that I get offended when Britain, France and the US do it.

What's that got to do with it?

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:08 pm

AnneBoleyn;1471253 wrote: What's that got to do with it?

It's a valid response to "people only get offended when Jews do it", Shirley.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:19 pm

FG;1471259 wrote: It's a valid response to "people only get offended when Jews do it", Shirley.

Do what?

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:46 pm

tude dog;1471260 wrote: Do what?

The trashing of the ancestral homelands of the Arabs, tude. Do keep up, it's all in the thread. You brought up the matter of Jews, Anne then claimed people only get offended when Jews trash the ancestral homelands of the Arabs - the "do it" was her phrase, not mine - and I pointed out, as my opening post makes very clear, that's an entirely wrong accusation when directed at me.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 6:29 pm

Would it were so. The French government, along with that of Britain and the US, has blood on its hands. Had the Western government responses to the criminal acts of 9/11 been criminal investigation, apprehension and prosecution, today's form of asymmetric criminal backlash would never have started at all.

Yea, dream on.

1993 World Trade Center bombing was treated as criminal act.

They came back eight years later to complete the job.

The deliberate long-term destruction of society in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria by those governments which chose to participate - which includes the French - is the prime cause of the radicalization which is now expressed in uncompromising criminal outrages like that of today.

BS

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 6:44 pm

FG;1471264 wrote: The trashing of the ancestral homelands of the Arabs, tude. Do keep up, it's all in the thread. You brought up the matter of Jews, Anne then claimed people only get offended when Jews trash the ancestral homelands of the Arabs - the "do it" was her phrase, not mine - and I pointed out, as my opening post makes very clear, that's an entirely wrong accusation when directed at me.

You just don't get it.

It was the Jewish market I spoke of. Of all places those murdering scumbags choose a Jewish market. The batrastards were the ones to include Jews in their murdering rampage. It is staple for radical Islamist when opportunity strikes to murder Jews.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 7:26 pm

tude dog;1471268 wrote: You just don't get it.

It was the Jewish market I spoke of. Of all places those murdering scumbags choose a Jewish market. The batrastards were the ones to include Jews in their murdering rampage. It is staple for radical Islamist when opportunity strikes to murder Jews.
I expect the chap who went there was peeved over the continuing fate of the Palestinian enclaves, don't you?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:29 am

tude dog;1471268 wrote: You just don't get it.

I think it is you sir, perhaps you are standing too close to see the overall picture...........it happens.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 8:49 am

FG;1471259 wrote: It's a valid response to "people only get offended when Jews do it", Shirley.

It's Shoiley to you bub.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:39 am

AnneBoleyn;1471291 wrote: It's Shoiley to you bub.

I am but an humble Englishman, ma'am, my familiarity with the Bronx is limited.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:46 am

FG;1471295 wrote: I am but an humble Englishman, ma'am, my familiarity with the Bronx is limited.

So is mine.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:54 pm

FG;1470956 wrote: France can scarcely call itself a country of freedom after tearing the heart out of so many functioning Middle-Eastern countries. Freely joining in this mayhem was a pact made by choice.

Wonderful illogic. The innocents of today must suffer because of the decisions of their ancestors. Pfft. In that case the we all deserved WWI because of the mistreatment of the German people by the Romans. And we all deserve to die horribly since we are Homo Sapiens and we treated those poor Neanderthals badly.

NO ONE, for any reason, has the right to kill innocent human beings. To place the blame on the victims and suggest is is revenge for acts of their government in the past is despicable and reprehensible!

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:05 pm

FG;1471269 wrote: I expect the chap who went there was peeved ove the continuing fate of the Palestinian enclavesr, don't you?

I dunno.

A fine way to start. Murdering artists, manager and whoever else in line of sight in the office of a Paris magazine publisher for the offence of insulting their prophet.

Didn't stop there.

the continuing fate of the Palestinian enclavesr,

So the answer is murdering Jews in France.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:06 pm

Saint_;1471319 wrote: Wonderful illogic. The innocents of today must suffer because of the decisions of their ancestors. Pfft. In that case the we all deserved WWI because of the mistreatment of the German people by the Romans. And we all deserve to die horribly since we are Homo Sapiens and we treated those poor Neanderthals badly.

NO ONE, for any reason, has the right to kill innocent human beings. To place the blame on the victims and suggest is is revenge for acts of their government in the past is despicable and reprehensible!

Decisions of their Ancestors ?

Many of the poor decisions were made in my life time by governments I had a hand in electing, and incidentally in your lifetime by your popularly elected governments, note the plural.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:12 pm

AnneBoleyn;1471296 wrote: So is mine.

LOL

Shure

Dat whole NYC thing is a culture in itself.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:15 pm

Bruv;1471321 wrote: Decisions of their Ancestors ?

Many of the poor decisions were made in my life time by governments I had a hand in electing, and incidentally in your lifetime by your popularly elected governments, note the plural.

Sure mistakes were made, on all sides. Men are fallible. I'm sorry if you feel wronged. Really. But under no circumstances do you have the right to slaughter innocents because of that. Any respectability, deservedness, or righteousness you might have had to your claims instantly evaporates when you wage war on innocents. I have absolutely no mercy for terrorists or their causes. As a matter of fact, it turns my heart against their causes.

To suggest that killing innocents is somehow "just retribution" or some kind of "backlash" is to condone what is a heinous crime against humanity. You open the door to every kind of evil act in humanity's darkest soul. The Germans were impoverished by the Treaty of Versailles? Oh, well then the Jews must have deserved the Holocaust! You say that some Native Americans killed some settlers? Well then they deserve to be wiped out completely! What? The Incas have rejected our Christian religion and have insulted us by not adopting it? Heathens! Let's kill them all!

It's all their own fault.

That is exactly the tone and idea adopted by FG in his original post. That somehow actions by others (or governments) made it inevitable that these people should die and that the criminals could be expected to retaliate and justly so.

I find that kind of thinking evil in the extreme.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:21 pm

Saint_;1471319 wrote: NO ONE, for any reason, has the right to kill innocent human beings.
I suggest you pass that on to your bloody-handed President, the drone-pilots under his command are doing just that on a regular basis.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:32 pm

tude dog;1471320 wrote: So the answer is murdering Jews in France.

Good lord no. You suggested " It is staple for radical Islamist when opportunity strikes to murder Jews" and I offered what might be his rationale in that I expect the chap who went there was peeved ove the continuing fate of the Palestinian enclaves. Of course it's not the answer. One answer would be to make the laws and constitution of Israel blind to ethnicity and religious identification. All murdering Jews in France achieves is increased tensions - I'm sure increased tensions was an intended aim too. Let's try not rising to the bait.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:36 pm

FG;1471324 wrote: I suggest you pass that on to your bloody-handed President, the drone-pilots under his command are doing just that on a regular basis.

That is a bald-faced lie. No innocents are ever targeted by us. Only terrorists. Unless you somehow think that ISIS terrorists and Al Quada terrorists are "innocent." Which you seem to do.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:42 pm

Let's make sure we keep a sharp eye out as well. These terrorists didn't target that newspaper for anything having to do with foreign involvement in their country or wrongs to their people.

They targeted it because the didn't like their words and pictures.

Do you stand up for that as well FG? It would be ironic in the extreme if you condoned violent death for anyone who didn't believe as you do all while running an internet forum.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:47 pm

Saint_;1471323 wrote: Sure mistakes were made, on all sides. Men are fallible. I'm sorry if you feel wronged. Really. But under no circumstances do you have the right to slaughter innocents because of that. Any respectability, deservedness, or righteousness you might have had to your claims instantly evaporates when you wage war on innocents. I have absolutely no mercy for terrorists or their causes. As a matter of fact, it turns my heart against their causes.

To suggest that killing innocents is somehow "just retribution" or some kind of "backlash" is to condone what is a heinous crime against humanity. You open the door to every kind of evil act in humanity's darkest soul. The Germans were impoverished by the Treaty of Versailles? Oh, well then the Jews must have deserved the Holocaust! You say that some Native Americans killed some settlers? Well then they deserve to be wiped out completely! What? The Incas have rejected our Christian religion and have insulted us by not adopting it? Heathens! Let's kill them all!

It's all their own fault.

That is exactly the tone and idea adopted by FG in his original post. That somehow actions by others (or governments) made it inevitable that these people should die and that the criminals could be expected to retaliate and justly so.

I find that kind of thinking evil in the extreme.

I think to be honest you have over reacted, not unlike several of your governments over the years.

You read far far more into the words that I read.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:56 pm

Saint_;1471328 wrote: Let's make sure we keep a sharp eye out as well. These terrorists didn't target that newspaper for anything having to do with foreign involvement in their country or wrongs to their people.

They targeted it because the didn't like their words and pictures.

Do you stand up for that as well FG? It would be ironic in the extreme if you condoned violent death for anyone who didn't believe as you do all while running an internet forum.

Maybe a cursory glance at the thread title that was started by FG himself

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:56 pm

Over-reacted you say? Let's examine:

FG;1470956 wrote:

Had the Western government responses to the criminal acts of 9/11 been criminal investigation, apprehension and prosecution, today's form of asymmetric criminal backlash would never have started at all.

Here FG suggests that the deaths of 2000 people should have been handled as a simple murder investigation. That is unrealistic for an act of war.

The deliberate long-term destruction of society in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria by those governments which chose to participate - which includes the French - is the prime cause of the radicalization which is now expressed in uncompromising criminal outrages like that of today.

But here is where he gets outrageous. He suggests that Islamic radicals would not kill people if only the rest of the world had left them alone. Or as a matter of fact would even have been radical. That is ridiculous in light of the entire history of Islam. Islam, itself, was founded by a thief and a murderer who raided towns and caravans and finally designated himself a prophet. Islam has been a violent, expansionist, and intolerant "religion" since it was founded.

And as I said, this attack has nothing to do with history as FG suggests. it has everything to do with a fascist-like desire to eliminate everything that does not fit in with their beliefs. My way or die.

I don't think I over-reacted at all.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:00 pm

I've said my peace. Terrorists are evil. All men of good conscience must stand against them without reservation.

*unsubscribed*

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:03 pm

Saint_;1471334 wrote: I've said my peace. Terrorists are evil. All men of good conscience must stand against them without reservation.

*unsubscribed*

I think we have just had a DRONE attack.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:30 pm

Saint_;1471328 wrote: Do you stand up for that as well FG? It would be ironic in the extreme if you condoned violent death for anyone who didn't believe as you do all while running an internet forum.

You're very consistent at flinging mud whenever you come into a thread like this with your extremist views. What I wrote in the opening post was "Obviously those who carried and used the rifles today must be found and prosecuted". Further down the thread you'll find "I'd like to see offensive (as opposed to defensive) killing for any reason, by anyone, regardless of what organization they belong to, made illegal by treaty obligation". Take your pick.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:36 pm

Saint_ wrote: [quote=FG][quote=Saint_]NO ONE, for any reason, has the right to kill innocent human beings.
I suggest you pass that on to your bloody-handed President, the drone-pilots under his command are doing just that on a regular basis.

That is a bald-faced lie. No innocents are ever targeted by us. Only terrorists. Unless you somehow think that ISIS terrorists and Al Quada terrorists are "innocent." Which you seem to do.

This really is your consistent level of deception, isn't it. You complain of killing innocent human beings - not targeting but killing. You then go ballistic at the suggestion "we" target innocents. I never suggested "we" did, I said the drone-pilots under your President's command are killing innocents on a regular basis. Or have you never heard the expression "collateral damage"? NO ONE, for any reason, has the right to kill innocent human beings.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:55 pm

FG;1471342 wrote: This really is your consistent level of deception, isn't it. You complain of killing innocent human beings - not targeting but killing. You then go ballistic at the suggestion "we" target innocents. I never suggested "we" did, I said the drone-pilots under your President's command are killing innocents on a regular basis. Or have you never heard the expression "collateral damage"? NO ONE, for any reason, has the right to kill innocent human beings.

Oh, you won't like this. I apologize in advance. The "terrorists", to keep a common word, deliberately have their weapons facilities located in hospitals, schools, within communities. They have their wives & children living amongst them, instead of separate from their planning activities. That is a reason for so many innocent deaths. Human shields of their own making.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 3:07 pm

AnneBoleyn;1471343 wrote: Oh, you won't like this. I apologize in advance. The "terrorists", to keep a common word, deliberately have their weapons facilities located in hospitals, schools, within communities. They have their wives & children living amongst them, instead of separate from their planning activities. That is a reason for so many innocent deaths. Human shields of their own making.

The option not to bomb doesn't exist, then?

Targeting, by the Overlord against the Underdog, in such utter disregard of the statistically inevitable consequences, is beyond merely shameful. It should be called what it is, and prosecuted for what it is - a crime against humanity.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 3:22 pm

FG;1471344 wrote: The option not to bomb doesn't exist, then?

Targeting, by the Overlord against the Underdog, in such utter disregard of the statistically inevitable consequences, is beyond merely shameful. It should be called what it is, and prosecuted for what it is - a crime against humanity.

The option not to bomb does exist. The inevitable consequences are chosen by the Underdog. There is such a thing as them stopping their violence. No one surrenders anymore. Fight on, fight on. I hearken this to the religious right as well. Abortion, the law of the land, yet.........bomb clinics, kill doctors. Everyone is so convinced they are right and never accept, never compromise.

What about choosing your fate, and those other lives you are responsible for? If I saw a Gandhi or Mandela or M.L. King amongst them, you can bet your life this story would have a different ending. But no. Fight on, fight on, despite the odds, despite the welfare of your own people.

G#Gill · Post by **G#Gill** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 3:43 pm

I'm bound to agree with Saint.

However, these so-called ISIS and Al Qaeda mobs are not really proper Islamists, simply because they seem to want to kill everybody, saying that they are infidels and are not of the Islam faith. Therefore must be killed ! I was told by somebody that these terrorists interpreted the Qu'ran saying that there were instructions to kill all 'unbelievers' - infidels ! That same somebody also said that the Qu'ran was supposed to advocate such a thing and that those who killed the 'infidels' would go to heaven. I suppose that's my card marked now ! Good job I'm not religious !

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 3:48 pm

G#Gill;1471346 wrote: those who killed the 'infidels' would go to heaven.I wonder what you think persuaded Christians to go on Crusade. They did write down their reasons at the time, some of them.

You'd like a clue??The first known use of plenary indulgences was in 1095 when Pope Urban II remitted all penance of persons who participated in the crusades and who confessed their sins. Later, the indulgences were also offered to those who couldn't go on the Crusades but offered cash contributions to the effort instead.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f ... ences.html

The modern-day equivalent is perhaps the US offer of full American citizenship in exchange for signing up for deployment to the Middle East in the US military.

Yes, they did.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:01 pm

FG;1471342 wrote: This really is your consistent level of deception, isn't it. You complain of killing innocent human beings - not targeting but killing. You then go ballistic at the suggestion "we" target innocents. I never suggested "we" did, I said the drone-pilots under your President's command are killing innocents on a regular basis. Or have you never heard the expression "collateral damage"? NO ONE, for any reason, has the right to kill innocent human beings.

Nobody has a right to kill human beings, innocent, or otherwise.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:13 pm

LarsMac;1471348 wrote: Nobody has a right to kill human beings, innocent, or otherwise.

And yet Nation States abrogate to themselves exactly that right, and delegate it to their agents. My own belief is that the moral code applied to people should equally apply to Nation States, though it never has.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:26 pm

It is claimed that the reason for the attack was their cartoons. Personally I doubt this is the case. Sure, it was a useful opportunity as it was a low security, easy target, with a high profile which would give them maximum publicity for their 'cause', and it is in this that they have succeeded in exactly that, goal, just as the very existence of this thread demonstrates.

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 10:58 pm

FG;1470956 wrote: I note the observation by French President Francois Hollande: "We knew we were threatened because we are a country of freedom".

Would it were so. The French government, along with that of Britain and the US, has blood on its hands. Had the Western government responses to the criminal acts of 9/11 been criminal investigation, apprehension and prosecution, today's form of asymmetric criminal backlash would never have started at all.

The deliberate long-term destruction of society in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria by those governments which chose to participate - which includes the French - is the prime cause of the radicalization which is now expressed in uncompromising criminal outrages like that of today.

To merely blame the criminal radicals is to entirely miss the point. This degree of backlash was predictable and inevitable. I'm quite sure that, for many of the chief instigators on both sides, it was the intended outcome.

Obviously those who carried and used the rifles today must be found and prosecuted. Those who stirred up the hornet nest for their own benefit in the first place are equally blameworthy. France can scarcely call itself a country of freedom after tearing the heart out of so many functioning Middle-Eastern countries. Freely joining in this mayhem was a pact made by choice.

You took my thoughts and put them deftly into words. I am with you 1000%.

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:07 pm

Saint_;1471334 wrote: I've said my peace. Terrorists are evil. All men of good conscience must stand against them without reservation.

*unsubscribed*

Yeah, but you bought the doublespeak, seeing us as righteous heralds of democracy and they as terrorists. We men of good conscience have no representation at the office of Big Brother. Now, if you believe that we (the men of good conscience) can disarm both the antagonist and the responder ..... well! Lead on!

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:04 pm

FG;1471324 wrote: I suggest you pass that on to your bloody-handed President, the drone-pilots under his command are doing just that on a regular basis.

Thank you, I'll add that to my list.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:21 pm

FG;1471325 wrote: Good lord no. You suggested " It is staple for radical Islamist when opportunity strikes to murder Jews"

I didn't suggest, it was a statement of fact.

FG;1471325 wrote: and I offered what might be his rationale in that I expect the chap who went there was peeved ove the continuing fate of the Palestinian enclaves.

I suppose that work just as well.

HE WAS BENT ON MURDERING INNOCENT JEWS.

FG;1471325 wrote: Of course it's not the answer. One answer would be to make the laws and constitution of Israel blind to ethnicity and religious identification.

NO

Would I like to see certain changes in the laws, yea.

All that has zilch to do with anything.

The Arabs just want Jews gone

FG;1471325 wrote: All murdering Jews in France achieves is increased tensions - I'm sure increased tensions was an intended aim too. Let's try not rising to the bait.

HUH?

bait ?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:22 pm

tude dog;1471460 wrote:

Thank you, I'll add that to my list.

Your list of what?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:30 pm

Why don't all the so called free press in the free west, exercise the press freedoms they hold so high and declare a day and publish the content that is supposed to have caused this out rage ?

And that is a serious question.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:38 pm

AnneBoleyn;1471462 wrote: Your list of what?

That was a proper question.

To answer might hijack the thread.

There is no actual list. Just call what I said 'poetic license'.