Slashdot Mirror


Man Who Named His Wi-Fi SSID 'Daesh 21' Prosecuted Under French Anti-Terror Law (arstechnica.com)

An 18-year-old man from Dijon was convicted for "praising terrorism" and was given a suspended sentence of three months in prison because the SSID of his Wi-Fi network was "Daesh 21." From an article on Ars Technica:Daesh is the Arabic acronym for Islamic State, and "21" in this context represents the number for the Cote d'Or, the French department, or province, where Dijon is located. The unnamed man was prosecuted under a new French anti-terrorism law (Article 421-2-5) passed in November 2014 that makes it a crime to "directly provoke acts of terrorism or to publicly praise one such act." If convicted, offenders can be punished by up to five years in prison and a $83,000 fine. Such penalties are raised to seven years and $111,000 if the crime was committed by using a "public online communication service." A local newspaper, Le Bien public, described the man as being "totally dazed" in front of the court and said that he was "not a terrorist." He was first sentenced to 100 hours of community service, which he refused, but he was finally given a three-month suspended sentence.

133 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. Daesh is depreciatory by RandomSurfer314 · · Score: 5, Informative

    How is that sentence possible? Using "daesh" does not appraise IS at all. They hate that name.

    1. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More to the point: how does naming a Wifi access point "Daesh" possibly constitute apology of terrorism, or aiding terrorists? It's not like some random dude will drive by with a laptop and suddenly go "Well, would you look at that: that there Wifi access point is called "Daesh". I suddenly want to kill infidels! Allahu akbar!!!"

      What that is really is a clear example of the french democracy going 1984...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cheese eating surrender monkeys try their best to stand firm against threats, failing miserably and looking like fools. Overreacting and antagonizing their own people against them. Funny stuff.

    3. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of my neighbors has his WiFi access point named after the local pro football team. I think a reasonable person would conclude he's a fan of that team. Same thing here.

      Wars are as much about moral support as they are about soldiers and weapons. Giving moral support to the enemy is on par with helping them get weapons. That really is the way war works.

      When a group (nation or otherwise) makes a habit of killing people in your country, showing support for them is a bad life strategy.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, what does that group call themselves? Be it in Arabic or English?

    5. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had my wifi named "fbi surveillance van" for several years, currently it is named Virus_distribution. Does that mean i support FBI surveillance of my community or am distributing a virus?

    6. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      That's actually a myth. "Daesh" is just the Arabic version of "ISIS". The fact that it sort of sounds like a word they don't like isn't really a factor.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    7. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Joviex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One of my neighbors has his WiFi access point named after the local pro football team. I think a reasonable person would conclude he's a fan of that team. Same thing here.

      Ah yes, the good old assumption law.

      Instead of asking his intent, and getting his take, like maybe he wanted to mark the NAME and the PLACE where a POS was held, in a public way, for people to remember, and never forget a POS's NAME.

      Luckily, we don't need to know his INTENT. We can just go arrest him, because of the good old assumption law!

      We have this here too! Brought to you in America by first world privilage birth, and re-enforced by the Patriot Act.

    8. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Instead of asking his intent

      Ah yes, asking for his intent, wherein he'll lie, distort or otherwise come up with some lame excuse. I keep seeing this theme throughout internet arguments. Intent is really hard to prove. Which is why conspiracy charges rarely require it, where you have to prove they intended to carry out the conspiracy.

      Next time you're caught speeding, try telling the cop, "I didn't intend to speed" and see where it gets you.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    9. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, the police are coming to your house to arrest you right now.

    10. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      If you're asking if I am rich or famous ... "I don't recall" ;)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    11. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      my network is currently named "RIAA Monitor Node" I sure as fuck dont support them.

    12. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by cybersquid · · Score: 1

      My SSID is "Your kids scream too much". Would you really think I am praising your children?

    13. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Depends. Does the FBI operate in France? Then you have your answer.

    14. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Joviex · · Score: 2

      Instead of asking his intent

      Ah yes, asking for his intent, wherein he'll lie, distort or otherwise come up with some lame excuse. I keep seeing this theme throughout internet argument

      LOL! So your first specious reason is invalid, but here is the second specious reason the first one is re-validated?

      Bro, thanks for the laugh off my ass today.

    15. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Having fun repeating that simpleton's mantra?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    16. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by OhSoLaMeow · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, asking for his intent, wherein he'll lie, distort or otherwise come up with some lame excuse. I keep seeing this theme throughout internet arguments. Intent is really hard to prove. Which is why conspiracy charges rarely require it, where you have to prove they intended to carry out the conspiracy.

      Next time you're caught speeding, try telling the cop, "I didn't intend to speed" and see where it gets you.

      I didn't intend to wipe my server with a cloth.

      --
      They can take my LifeAlert pendant when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
    17. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      Giving moral support to the enemy is on par with helping them get weapons. That really is the way war works.

      No its not there is no moral equivalence there at all in fact! The right to question your own people/nations motives and the justification or lack there of for a war is crucial part of democracy. I am not suggesting at all there won't be am impact in doing so but the right to speak out is one of the core western values we should be fighting to up hold. Yes even when the occasional moron wants to make the argument we should reform our society into violent extremist Islamic theocracy. The correct response isn't to jail them, its to ignore their position if you are confident they will be dismissed as a crank or argue against it, perhaps to shout in their face or even organize a group of people to drown them out, but not take away their right to speak.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    18. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by war4peace · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A better analogy is you being arrested and convicted for supporting illegal racing because your license plate reads "ND4SPD".

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    19. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      My interpretation of this would be a criticism of the state's immigration/refugee policy. If "21" is his district's number, "Daesh 21" sounds like he thinks his district is turning into an outpost of Islamic State.

      But, you know, far be it from the state to persecute people for disagreeing with them by abusing stupid laws.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    20. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by Type44Q · · Score: 3, Funny

      The French are coming to your house right now; fortunately they're only armed with Brie and pÃté.

    21. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by lgw · · Score: 1

      If you had that license plate, you can bet you'd start getting far more tickets. Another bad life strategy.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    22. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by lgw · · Score: 1

      The right to question your own people/nations motives and the justification or lack there of for a war is crucial part of democracy.

      Find a way to do that without looking like you're supporting the enemy in an ongoing war. The terrorism thing can get a bit muddy, but ISIS in particular is killing people in France in particular, no ambiguity there, and you don't go around supporting the other side after the shooting starts.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    23. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by skr95062 · · Score: 1

      Next time you're caught speeding, try telling the cop, "I didn't intend to speed" and see where it gets you.

      I did. After the officer stopped laughing he gave me a ticket anyway and said "Nice try Hillary"

    24. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by quax · · Score: 1

      Exactly. This is stupid on so many levels, it boggles the mind.

    25. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by quax · · Score: 1

      So if I call my WiFi access point "Drumpf", will you mistake me for a Trump fan?

    26. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      I think in this context since it's well known they hate the name it's plausible they prosecuted them for the 'provoke an attack' portion of the law.

      It's still BS though. It just proves that France has caved completely. Though I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

      Pretty sure naming your Wifi hotspot 'Viva La Sharia Law' would be perfectly legal.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    27. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between lending material support and holding / advocating the opinion that the other side should win. Is supporting the enemy of ones own nation adopted or otherwise disgraceful? I would I think agree with you that it is. I would have some pretty choice words for anyone suggesting there is one iota of goodness in ISIS and what they stand for, but I would not seek jail them.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    28. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      Unreliable sources.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    29. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly, they are not acting rationally, they are responding based solely on fear and misunderstanding. They have already surrendered, and the terrorists have already won.

      Just like here in the US.

    30. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >pÃté.

      Hey, now. It's not nice to call people names in Klingon, even if they are French...

    31. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Sulik · · Score: 1

      +1 if I had mod points

      --
      Help! I am a self-aware entity trapped in an abstract function!
    32. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The French are coming to your house right now; fortunately they're only armed with Brie and pÃté.

      What - no wine or crusty bread? Damn.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    33. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      hahaha

      Imagine the sentence if he had used " FuckFrance " instead.

      They probably would have brought back the guillotine.

      I laugh but certain phrases and words here in the US of A would probably be met with the same treatment.

      What a time to be alive :| :facepalm:

    34. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      What do you think they're coming for?!

    35. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Now from the geek side, who could have named his wireless network what ever the fuck he wanted to, including cock sucker mother fucking cunt, all he had to do was turn of SSID broadcasting. Gees, if you can not remember the name of your own wireless network, you should not be allowed to set one up. People turn off network ID broadcast and that should be the default (that broadcasting of the name will always be legally problematic). That's right all of you, that haven't done so, log into your firewall router wireless modem, get into configuration settings and hide SSID and one other I just checked on, turn on client isolation (isolates wireless from wired)

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    36. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by haruchai · · Score: 1

      "One of my neighbors has his WiFi access point named after the local pro football team. I think a reasonable person would conclude he's a fan of that team. Same thing here."

      No one who supports those murdering towelheads calls them Daesh and they've threatened to cut out the tongues of everyone they can get their hands on that calls them by that acronym

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    37. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by phayes · · Score: 1

      France also has laws on the books condemning those who deny the Holocaust. Are you taking a stand against those too?

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    38. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Because you think cops are naive and have no sense of humor?

      It's safer to assume that.

    39. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      When a group (nation or otherwise) makes a habit of killing people in your country, showing support for them is a bad life strategy.

      One small problem with your fine theory: The name "daesh" is regarded as an insult by ISIS. So the WiFi network name didn't support them, it insulted them. Sort of like someone naming their WiFi "Hillary2016" and being branded a Trump supporter.

    40. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      The French are coming to your house right now; fortunately they're only armed with Brie and pÃftÃf©.

      Unless they're visiting a German house, in which case it's traditional for them to be armed with a white flag.

    41. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by lgw · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between lending material support and holding / advocating the opinion that the other side should win.

      Not according to centuries of military theory, there isn't. Man, material, morale - these are the components of an army.

      When A and B are in a war, you can fight for A by shooting at B, sure, but also by making stuff for A or sabotaging the industry of B, or by boosting the morale of A or dragging down the morale of B. 20th century history showed that attacking industry is actually less important than attacking morale, BTW.

      I would have some pretty choice words for anyone suggesting there is one iota of goodness in ISIS and what they stand for, but I would not seek jail them.

      If the casualties were more widespread, jail would be the least of his worries. Judge Lynch is notoriously inconsiderate of intention and misunderstood details.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    42. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      A couple of my friends use "CSIS Interception Point #xxx" we don't have the FBI in the country, I chuckle when I do see "fbi surveillance van" in Canada though.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    43. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Several residents in Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city which fell to the extremist group in June [2014], told The Associated Press that the militants threatened to cut the tongue of anyone who publicly used the acronym Daesh, instead of referring to the group by its full name, saying it shows defiance and disrespect. The residents spoke anonymously out of fear for their safety.

      I'm gonna go with the AP until you come up with actual documentation to support your claim.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    44. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by allo · · Score: 1

      Nobody expects the french inquisition.

    45. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by ememisya · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure who is dumber here, French laws or the Frenchman? So they managed to prove an 18 year old was "praising" fear spread in the name of political influence (very objective concepts mind you) by setting his SSID to Daesh Network for all those who see it in the Wifi range. Maybe I'm reading the article wrong.

    46. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1
      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    47. Re: Daesh is depreciatory by doccus · · Score: 1

      "May I call you Ludo, Ludo? There's good in everyone, Ludo...even the French"
      Hard to believe that 30 years ago this line was not only NOT censored by the BBC, but even was also one of France's most popular series. The Iron lady said it was her favorite series.
      Now? It would be "fomenting hate" This fu%^$g xenophobia and "political correctness" has got to stop. If someone from another culture does something wrong or illegal, we;ve got to be able to call them out on it, without being scared of stepping on their tender tootsies...

    48. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I hope you realise that completely fails to contradict the account related by the Associated Press.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    49. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      It indicates they don't actually consider it bad, at least any more. An anonymous report from more than two years ago versus an expert? Hmm, I wonder which is more likely to be right.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    50. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Yes I would. If someone wants spout nonsense they should be allowed to spout nonsense. Its incumbent on the rest of us to act like responsible thinking people and ignore their obviously counter factual nonsense.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    51. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by phayes · · Score: 1

      The U.S. != the world.

      You feel it's nonsense. We define it as hate speech.

      If you feel so strongly about how the U.S. interpretation of what should be free to say is the only justifiable one you're welcome to come to France and make inflammatory statements that are against our laws. Because you see, you don't make our laws and your opinion matters not. You'll still be going to jail.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    52. Re:Daesh is depreciatory by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      because this is europe and the free world lol ... i wonder why no one ever believes me when i said that all i ever feared was to be stuck in belgium after i turn 40 and by now europe isnt far enough away from here. The continent is crumbling, they stop at nothing to get money for the champagne parties at the pigfarm. In belgium electricty is since a bit taxed as if its a luxury product.
      squeeze harder guys, there might be a drop left
      its the proverbial old man in suit holding on the past so hard that it chokes the future
      i wont discriminate, it could be a woman as well

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  2. The terrorists have won by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When your own government acts like terrorists -- you know the terrorists have won.

    The terrorists have very effectively smashed the US Constitution and removed a huge swathe of "freedoms" that were previously enjoyed by Western nations. They did not do this alone -- the governments of those nations were complicit with the terrorists' objectives by bending to the pressure.

    As Midnight OIl said: I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees. Sadly, Western governments have opted to strip their peoples of the freedoms they're (allegedly) trying to protect, in promise of security.

    Benajin Franklin quote goes here [....]

    1. Re:The terrorists have won by eepok · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Riiight. And that's evident how? Tell me how your life exhibits the Constitution having been smashed. Which freedoms did you have, but do not have today? Ya, Western governments are over-stepping bounds, but I'm fairly certain you weren't shot for typing your response. Nor will you be prosecuted. Nor will anyone else give much of a damn. Your freedoms are 99.999% intact and the police will still come to protect them when you call and the legal system will continue to prosecute and defend the accused. But if living in a dystopic fantasy land is your thing, then you do you.

    2. Re:The terrorists have won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Constitution protects more than life, and many of us value freedoms that are not strictly necessary for living better than a slave. I used to have privacy when I made a phone call. I used to be able to fly without being groped. My threshold for "smashed" is apparently a lot higher than yours.

    3. Re:The terrorists have won by bondsbw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Western governments are over-stepping bounds, but I'm fairly certain you weren't shot for typing your response. Nor will you be prosecuted.

      The government prosecuting speech of an individual is precisely the point of this whole post.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    4. Re:The terrorists have won by bigbang137 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How dumb do you have to be to ask this question? It was just a few weeks ago that the FBI forced all people in a building to unlock their iphones if they had a fingerprint unlock. People get subject to ridiculous security theater and their skin to radiation-intensive scanning in airports everyday. When they google pressure cooker, they get a visit from the bureau. What else do you want?

    5. Re:The terrorists have won by by+(1706743) · · Score: 2
      While I agree with your general sentiment, I think there are some subtleties to this, somewhat analogous to the "fire in a crowded theater" sort of thing.

      For instance, at least in the US, one doesn't (AFAIK...) have the "right" to call in a bomb threat. This is, if you like, removing some freedom of speech -- but I think it's entirely justifiable. So, what if someone names their SSID, "I_put_a_bomb_in_PS118" -- should we allow that? What about, "I will kill your family, $NameOfNeighbor"?

      And regarding the Franklin quote, I believe the passage is

      Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

      (my emphasis) Freedom of speech is, in my mind, essential; but one has to balance the "freedom to cause legitimate concern for personal safety" on the one hand, and the "freedom to feel safe using common-sense metrics" on the other. (Whether or not this particular case falls under those categories is debatable, of course.)

      That said, in this particular instance, I agree that it's a bit over-the-top, but I could imagine a similar, more malicious situation where this sort of action makes some amount of sense. In such cases, a catch-all "the government said I couldn't do this there goes all my freedoms" attitude can lack some of the necessary subtleties, at least in my opinion.

    6. Re:The terrorists have won by mlw4428 · · Score: 1

      The concept that you ever really had privacy when making a phone call is laughable. You have privacy only if that call is properly encrypted by both parties. As for "groped", I haven't been patted down for quite a while. Yes a wave of a metal detector and going through a scanner. But then again if I told the Founding Fathers that one day there would exist massive vehicles that can fly 100s of times faster than the fastest horse of their day with the capability of destroying a city block - they'd probably agree that SOME level of protection was necessary.

      I mean I'm not allowed to walk into a nuclear power plant and never would have been allowed. Is my freedom smashed? The fact that remains that a massive chunk of your own personal freedoms still exist. You can still criticize the government. That's a huge step up from places whose freedom is truly "smashed".

    7. Re:The terrorists have won by fred6666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Which part of the US constitution was smashed so that it no longer applies to France?

    8. Re:The terrorists have won by lgw · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Even in the US, free speech does not extend to giving aid and comfort to the enemy. And, yes, showing public support for the enemy counts. I do think a suspended sentence was appropriate here, of course, since he probably had no ill intent.

      Showing public support for a group that makes a habit of killing people in your country is just a bad life strategy.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    9. Re:The terrorists have won by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      They did not do it, the panicky idiot republicans and democrats that have been waiting for a reason to gut the constitution and it's pesky rights did it.

      The fuckers in Washington have been WAITING to fuck up the constitution for decades. The terrorists are not at fault, it's the shitbag leaders we have empowered by panicky idiot citizens.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:The terrorists have won by nitehawk214 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "If you don't like the government abuse of free speech, just shut up."

      Awesome advice there, jackass.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    11. Re: The terrorists have won by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I guess it would be better if the Nazi's contracted out their dirty work at Auschwitz. Then they could have been excused by people like yourself. (yes, I Godwined the thread).

      "The Nazis didn't kill the Jews, the private contractors did"

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    12. Re:The terrorists have won by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Which freedoms did you have, but do not have today?

      The freedom to travel [by air] without having one's nutsack groped.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:The terrorists have won by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Which freedoms did you have, but do not have today?

      Why don't you ask Susette Kelo?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    14. Re:The terrorists have won by tsqr · · Score: 1

      Western governments are over-stepping bounds, but I'm fairly certain you weren't shot for typing your response. Nor will you be prosecuted.

      The government prosecuting speech of an individual is precisely the point of this whole post.

      Free speech is not unlimited. There are quite a number of restrictions on speech (e.g., encitement, slander and libel, child porn, fighting words, false advertising. Of course, that's in the USA, and TFA is about France.

    15. Re:The terrorists have won by quax · · Score: 1

      They may me riding to their ultimate triumph come Tuesday.

    16. Re:The terrorists have won by quax · · Score: 1

      You really didn't pay attention to this whole Snowden thing, did you?

    17. Re:The terrorists have won by quax · · Score: 1

      Even in the US, free speech does not extend to giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

      How exactly is insulting the enemy, giving aid and comfort?

      http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/why-i...

    18. Re: The terrorists have won by zlives · · Score: 1

      fucking Haliburton

    19. Re:The terrorists have won by zlives · · Score: 1

      you missed out on the "practically terrorism" bit in your outrage,
      don't feed the troll

    20. Re:The terrorists have won by zlives · · Score: 1

      personally i like the "all Mexicans are rapists" SSID
      or my guest network SSID "Grab the Pussy"

      subtle enough?!!

    21. Re:The terrorists have won by Pluvius · · Score: 1

      "Aid and comfort" is a fairly well-defined legal term, and simply praising a terrorist group or act would not meet the necessary criteria for it beyond a reasonable doubt. And this specific case where someone just named something after a terrorist group would be laughed out of court here.

      https://www.jstor.org/stable/7...

      Rob

    22. Re:The terrorists have won by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 1

      Except, at one point in time, saying "Black people and white people should have the right to marry each other." could incite violence. People could, and did, get hurt for saying those things; so should we have shut those speeches, rallies, protests, and marches down because someone could get hurt?

      The hard part about freedom is fighting for the other person's right to say things that you think are sick and twisted. No one fights because they think $DEITY is with the other side - everyone thinks they are "in the right". The Constitution has freedom of speech FIRST for a reason.

      Of course, if anything goes beyond "speech" - violence, oppression, etc. then it is time to drop the hammer. However, if it remains speech, then it should be protected.

      P.S. - It is legal to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater. It is the desire to incite violence or mayhem that makes it illegal. (Ex: There could be a real fire.)

      --
      Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
    23. Re:The terrorists have won by phayes · · Score: 1

      The U.S Constitution is not germane to a discussion on French laws.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  3. The court apparently overlooked something... by orospakr · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Daesh" is a pejorative term for ISIS. Referring to it by that name is hardly "praise".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  4. Europe's tenuous relationship with liberty... by chaboud · · Score: 1

    It's sad to see continual erosion of civil liberties in Europe. Whether Germany with removal of Nazi affiliation or France with biased enforcement of "religious" symbols, it's been the classic example of a slippery slope, and it's mass democracy at its worst.

  5. Will they also prosecute 100 fathers every year ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For naming their daughter Isis ?

  6. Re:Dont fool yourselfs by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

    Yep, and it's not new either: for decades, France has had laws curtailing free speech when it comes to the jews. For example, if you say "jews smell of elderberries" publicly, you can be prosecuted and end up in the slammer.

    Me, I have nothing against jews. But I find it outrageous - not to mention counterproductive - that you can't say anything remotely critical of them. At least in the US, where any old antisemite can say whatever the hell they want in public provided they don't call for violence, and often do so vocally, their very act of exercising their right makes them look like massive idiots who get to be kept under surveillance. In France, they stay under the radar and make converts. But hang around long enough in any bar in France and you'll quickly realize many, many of them are jew haters.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  7. Sentencing Refused by entropy01 · · Score: 2

    "He was first sentenced to 100 hours of community service, which he refused..." How does that work?
    Judge: I sentence you to community service.
    Defendant: No thanks.
    Judge: Is a suspended sentence OK?
    Defendant: Meh,.. I guess.

  8. be more precise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That wiki is mega long. You want us to read it ? It isnt pejorstive per see as it is either is acronym or a shortening. And some (stupid) french youth have been using it as oraise form. That said either the court over reacted or , as usual, the aritcle is omiting some serious side which led to the judgment. Would not be the first time.

  9. H. L. Mencken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
    -- H. L. Mencken

    1. Re:H. L. Mencken by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I don't see the word "white" anywhere in the quote.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  10. SSIDs are great anonymous billboards by swb · · Score: 3, Funny

    When I setup my sister in law's access point in a small apartment building and I was explaining why she should use a password, we ended up naming her SSID "Fuck off, freeloaders".

    I named mine "Shocking Porn", which was all well and good until I ended up with my wife and six other women seated around the dining room table planning an event for the elementary school and one of them wanted wifi....

    1. Re:SSIDs are great anonymous billboards by pz · · Score: 1

      I've seen SSIDs that were designed to repel freeloaders through an emotional response. My favorite was "Boston Police". Maybe it was the police, maybe not. Are YOU going to risk running a torrent through that AP?

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    2. Re:SSIDs are great anonymous billboards by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Yeah like people wearing those Female Body Inspector t-shirts, I mean how would you know they're not undercover federal agents hiding in plain sight?

  11. France is very far from the US. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People assume that, because of France's exported image of liberty/equality/fraternity, it must be a bastion of freedom. It isn't. It's one of the most restrictive states in the Western world. Remember this is the country where women were recently fined for not exposing enough of their skin on beaches, because it's "un-French" to cover up.

    If you wonder why there are so many acts of terrorism in France, it's because - unlike most of the West, which just leaves peaceful Muslims alone to do whatever - there is an on-going internal cultural war between things that are considered French and non-French, and that war isn't just of words but enforced by laws. For example, everyone marched under the ostensible freedom-of-speech banner of je suis Charlie, but this is the same publication that was being regularly attacked in the courts by the government when poked fun at some aspect of Judaism.

    tl;dr do NOT trust France. They do not bring the same values to the table as the US, the UK, Ireland, post-Franco Spain, the Low Countries, Scandinavia, Finland, or even post-Nazi Germany. They have been the model so far of severe, irrelevant restrictions of rights with the excuse of "terror!" - nothing like the US, which while imposing temporary bullshit that undoubtedly curb the principles enshrined in the Constitution, still has a massive public voice in opposition, and has not crept in scope anywhere like in France. The best thing we can do is NOT follow them.

    1. Re:France is very far from the US. by unixisc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you wonder why there are so many acts of terrorism in France, it's because - unlike most of the West, which just leaves peaceful Muslims alone to do whatever - there is an on-going internal cultural war between things that are considered French and non-French, and that war isn't just of words but enforced by laws. For example, everyone marched under the ostensible freedom-of-speech banner of je suis Charlie, but this is the same publication that was being regularly attacked in the courts by the government when poked fun at some aspect of Judaism.

      tl;dr do NOT trust France. They do not bring the same values to the table as the US, the UK, Ireland, post-Franco Spain, the Low Countries, Scandinavia, Finland, or even post-Nazi Germany. They have been the model so far of severe, irrelevant restrictions of rights with the excuse of "terror!" - nothing like the US, which while imposing temporary bullshit that undoubtedly curb the principles enshrined in the Constitution, still has a massive public voice in opposition, and has not crept in scope anywhere like in France. The best thing we can do is NOT follow them.

      While there may be problems w/ France, whenever I read about terror attacks anywhere in the world, I don't wonder what the recipient did wrong. I assume - and am frequently proven right - that it's Muslims being Islamic. Nothing more, nothing less.

      Take the Charlie Hebdo paper, for instance. Yeah, they did cartoons mocking Jews, but Jews did not take it up to themselves to shoot up the place. A lot of people and media outlets, particularly in Europe and particularly of the Left, are downright obnoxious, but none of the targets of their attacks take it upon themselves to resort to violence. Even in the US, you have media outlets regularly attack all sorts of groups, barring one. Muslims. B'cos they know that they'll be attacked for being 'racist' by terror groups like CAIR on one end, as well as get targeted by Muslim vigilantes on the other.

      If you think France is an exception, look at Denmark. You had those Danish cartoons, followed by not just protests and boycotts of Danish products (perfectly legitimate) but also death threats. And you've had terror attacks in the UK, Germany and other places. Normally, I'm against any government ordering its citizens to undress, but the presence of burqinis or burqhas in beaches is definitely intimidating, given how jihadist terror can occur anywhere

      Also, on the issue of what is French and non-French, that's a perfectly valid 'cultural war' to have. First of all, not all countries are 'international' countries, and any nation is at liberty to define itself not just by borders, but also by language and culture. France was at one time a Catholic country that has morphed into a secular one, but it is still well within its rights to impose curbs on people wanting to be a part of it. While religious freedom is there, it's perfectly legitimate for them to tell Muslims, 'If you are going to have 4 wives, you're not welcome here. If you are going to honor kill your daughter for wanting to marry a French non-Muslim, we will toss you in jail. If you are going to spraypaint graffiti on synagoges, you are going away. If you behead a priest at an alter, we will kill you.'

      So yeah, France is not a country I admire, but on this issue, they have it dead right. They need to make it tough for Muslims to practice Shariah law within their countries. Those who want to do that can be deported back to Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco or whichever country they came from. Or give them a one way ticket to Raqqa to join ISIS, and see to it that they can never enter Europe again

    2. Re:France is very far from the US. by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      France is a target because it's a former colonial power. It hosts many immigrants from those former colonies (Islamic countries). Many of those immigrants haven't integrated well, continue to live in poverty, have trouble finding jobs etc.
      IOW, the issue is more complex than you assume.

    3. Re:France is very far from the US. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      If the Westborough Chuch wasn't widely condemned and disowned not only by Liberal, but also Conservative religious organizations, I would indeed conclude that they are real Christians. The equivalent in the Middle East - while there are many Islamic groups that condemn ISIS, none of them are very different themselves, except in degree. Whereas not only does the Westborough Church get condemned - the churches who condemn them don't behave anything like them

    4. Re:France is very far from the US. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Also, while the groups may be 'disparate', the religious bigotry that is aggressively preached by Islam is something that's common to all the countries and present in all Muslim countries - Indonesia, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, Bahrein, Egypt, Lebanon, Sudan, Libya, Tunisia, Alegeria, Morocco, Bosnia, Kosovo,...

    5. Re:France is very far from the US. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      France left those countries decades ago. Why is it a right for any of their people to live in France, particularly if they are not interested in becoming French?

    6. Re:France is very far from the US. by hackertourist · · Score: 1
    7. Re:France is very far from the US. by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      A lot of them came in just after WW2, providing the much needed workforce for rebuilding the country. Yeah, they kept their islamic culture but they did the job so they got the citizenship they deserved. You have to understand that they did France a great service.
      Problem is : now there is nothing left to rebuild, so they lost many of the jobs they were for in the first place, which resulted in poverty, crime, etc...
      What they didn't lose however is their ability to make children. Not only they tend to make more children due to their culture but they also took advantages of the government incentives. They are the reason why the birth rate in France is higher than in most western countries. And most of the "immigrants" that are so much criticized right now aren't. They are born in France, often from parents who are French citizens. France is their home country.

  12. he was offered a deal by aepervius · · Score: 1

    He refused the deal went before a tribunal and got a harsher sentence. That alone tells me there is a whole unsaid part, or the tribunal judge are idiot. I tend to think unsaid part, as very usually important details are left out. But hey it is the french, so let us bash happily, and show how unürejudicied we all are ....

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:he was offered a deal by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      He refused the deal went before a tribunal and got a harsher sentence.

      Actually he got a milder sentence for a law-abiding citizen. A suspended sentence is just a warning, unless you do it again.

    2. Re:he was offered a deal by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Actually he got a milder sentence for a law-abiding citizen. A suspended sentence is just a warning, unless you do it again.

      No, a suspended sentence goes on your record until the suspension period is over, which is much longer than the community service. It also counts as a prison sentence, whether it has been served or not.
      It can ruin a man's life for a long time.

      Thankfully, France isn't the US, where pretty much every sentence is a life sentence as far as employment opportunities go. But still, very harsh.

  13. no it is not by aepervius · · Score: 1

    It is an acronym, and it is near other word pronunciation, daes for example, that is why they dislike it. But it is not per see pejorative and some youth have been praising it and using it even tagging it on wall (see north banlieu la courneuve, saint denis, even heard a rap on it)..

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:no it is not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Within areas under its control, ISIL considers use of the acronym Daesh punishable by flogging[337] or cutting out the tongue.[338]

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Name

  14. As a joke not very funny, but... by unfortunateson · · Score: 1

    I like my guest network name:
    DHS Monitoring Van

    --
    Design for Use, not Construction!
  15. Ah yes... founding father Benajin Franklin by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 5, Funny

    Benajin Franklin quote goes here [....]

    Yes, we need to remember those quotes by Benajin Franklin and those other famous founding fathers like
    Tosam Jefferson
    Groeg Washington
    Alexnader Hamilton
    Jasm Madison
    Samle Adams
    and others.

  16. Oh France! by jrq · · Score: 1

    At least you have égalité and fraternité left.

    --
    My UID is prime!
    1. Re:Oh France! by jrq · · Score: 1

      I mean, you have égalité and fraternité left

      --
      My UID is prime!
  17. Its real name is 'Islamic State' by unixisc · · Score: 2

    I looked it up. Daesh is abbreviated, but not the Arabic version of ISIS - GP is right. The group calls itself ad-Dawlah al-Islmiyah ( ), which one can easily guess translates to 'Islamic State'. Before 2014, when their ambitions were more local, they were called ad-Dawlah al-Islmiyah f 'l-Irq wa-sh-Shm ( ) - which translates into either Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant

    I prefer just calling them 'Islamic State', given that various Islamic groups worldwide - from Philippines to Nigeria - have declared themselves their affiliates, and that it's now present in over 30 countries. People are welcome to claim that they are not Islamic, but that's something every Muslim group/sect says about others.

    1. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      Primary sources say otherwise; it is just an Arabic abbreviation of their name. It's not a pejorative.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    2. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by unixisc · · Score: 1

      The claim is that Arabs don't abbreviate terms to coin such words. The Wiki article I cited pointed to the Syrian government as the one who coined it, and it got rapidly adapted by everybody

    3. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by vux984 · · Score: 2

      Just like calling Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece & Spain the PIIGS to concisely call out the 5 weakest countries in the eurozone financial crisis. That's not perjorative either right? It's just a simple acronym. Nobody was offended by it right?

      Oh wait..
      "The term is widely considered derogatory .."
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      But your right Daesh is just an arabic abbreviation; and nobody is offended by it...

      "The term âoeDaeshâ is strategically a better choice because it is still accurate in that it spells out the acronym of the groupâ(TM)s full Arabic name, al-Dawla al-Islamiya fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham. Yet, at the same time, âoeDaeshâ can also be understood as a play on words â" and an insult. Depending on how it is conjugated in Arabic, it can mean anything from âoeto trample down and crushâ to âoea bigot who imposes his view on others.â Already, the group has reportedly threatened to cut out the tongues of anyone who uses the term."

      https://blog.ap.org/announceme...

      "Several residents in Mosul, Iraqâ(TM)s second-largest city which fell to the extremist group in June, told The Associated Press that the militants threatened to cut the tongue of anyone who publicly used the acronym Daesh, instead of referring to the group by its full name, saying it shows defiance and disrespect. The residents spoke anonymously out of fear for their safety."

    4. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by tsqr · · Score: 1

      Islam itself is not a moderate religion, so saying 'radical' Islam is redundant, as even a cursory reading of the Quran and Sunnah will reveal. It's like saying 'pregnancy-induced childbirth'

      If a group of Christians started executing people for lighting unauthorized fires, wearing unkempt hair, eating pork, having sex with specific relatives, having gay sex, or committing blashphemy, they'd most likely be called "radical" and distinguished from run-of-the-mill or 'moderate' Christians, even though the Bible (in Leviticus) imposes the death penalty for all those things. As a matter of fact, most 'moderate' Christians would consider Fred Phelps and his little group of warm-hearted folks, radical.

    5. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by RandomSurfer314 · · Score: 1

      I'd rather call them Daesh. By calling them "Islamic State" you're actually following their propaganda. They are neither a state nor are they islamic. They are savages.

    6. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by vux984 · · Score: 1

      I didn't say anything about PIIGS or whether it's derogatory

      You DID say:

      "it is just an Arabic abbreviation of their name. It's not a pejorative."

      That implied to me that you were arguing that things that are "just an abbreviation" are not pejorative. PIIGS is a counter example. Its fine if you agree, and didn't intend to make a statement about 'just an abbreviation' in general.

      So we agree then that that things at are 'just abbreviations' can still be perjorative?

      And that just leaves the very specific case of "Daesh", which you claimed wasn't perjorative. But that doesn't really stand up if you read MY links, which show:

      a) clear intent by western powers to use Daesh specifically to show disrespect and to cause offense. Intent of the speaker to cause offense is practically the defining characteristic of a slur.

      and

      b) clear offense taken by them, with reports by the AP going so far as to threaten to cut out the tongues of anyone they heard using the term.

      I'm not sure how you can possibly think the contents of your links (which i did read) refute this.

    7. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how you can possibly think the contents of your links (which i did read) refute this.

      Because SILENCE, INFIDEL!

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    8. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      No, I did not mean to make a blanket statement about abbreviations in general. AP reports on those threats are both old and based on unreliable information, and whether or not Western powers intend disrespect is irrelevant to whether disrespect is acknowledged. If you're trying to cause offense but none is taken, then at the very least it's not an effective pejorative. Perhaps I should have said ISIS doesn't take it as a pejorative rather than saying it isn't one, though.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    9. Re:Its real name is 'Islamic State' by unixisc · · Score: 1

      They already control - like a government - large swathes of territory in Iraq & Syria, even if its area is constantly changing. It's like claiming that the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was not a state b'cos nobody (except 3 countries) recognized it. If any group controls - either legitimately or by force - any stretch of land and governs it like a state, you better believe they are a state.

      And on Islamic, you claim they are not Islamic b'cos...?

  18. I don't think that means what you think that means by Atrox666 · · Score: 1

    Daesh is actually an insult to the Islamic state people. It's anti-terrorist not pro-terrorist.

    https://www.freewordcentre.com...

  19. Terrornetzwerk by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    A pub I frequent has a community above or in a neighbour house where the SSID of the WLAN is "Terrornetzwerk".

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  20. Give him a break by downright · · Score: 1

    Daesh 1-20 were already taken. What are we talking about again?

  21. Dijon had IS attacks in 2014 by kencurry · · Score: 1

    ... and if you RTFA you would see he was offered 100 hrs community service, but he declined. So he had a soft exit and passed on it. Dijon had back to back IS terrorist attack in 2014 with people run down in the street and knifed. No way they are going have a sense of humor about his cute WIFI name; Kid deserved what he got..

    --
    sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
  22. France is a pathetic police state by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    Perpetually offended and afraid.

  23. Does that mean by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Does that mean I should rename my wifi SSID from "Homeland Monitoring Station 325" to something more innocuous?

    (Seriously, that's what it's named, so if you see it you're in my neighborhood!)

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  24. I trust... by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    I trust it's still OK to refer to present day France as "Vichy 2.0" and to refer to its current leader by the honorary title of "Marshal Putain"?

  25. what makes you think they "overlooked" that? by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    Europe generally outlaws speech that upsets people and might provoke violence. So, you can get prosecuted for praising a radical organization, but you can also get prosecuted for insulting a radical organization, on the theory that you might be provoking violence.

  26. SSID frogidiots by mbeckman · · Score: 1

    The French. Who can understand their bureaucratic lunacy? Just eat a snail and move on.

  27. Re:Freedom? You have to join the migration movemen by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    A migration of liberty minded activists has been moving for the purpose of achieving a disproportional impact on politics at the state level and has been having some success.

    Or, in plain English, Let's go someplace where we outnumber the locals, then take over and run things to suit ourselves, and the hell with them and how they feel about it.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  28. Re:Provinces by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    That worked out real well for them in Algeria, n'est-ce pas?

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  29. Yes but the acronym in itself is NOT pejorative by aepervius · · Score: 1

    They just don't like it because it is *near* other words, look it up. It is an important precision. And france is not under daesh control and a lot of very young idiot are using it.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  30. Re: He said Jehovah! by bugnuts · · Score: 1

    You're just making it worse on yourself.

  31. What an idiocy by Damouze · · Score: 1

    If having an Arabic word as an SSID for your wifi becomes grounds for arrest, France has really lost its way.

    What's next? Procecuting the creators of Joan of Arcardia for using "One of us" by Joan Osborne, or even more silly, Joan Osborne herself? The song contains the phrase "god is great"... Of course, the first case would be doubly ironic, because of the reference to the 100 years' war.

    --
    And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
    1. Re:What an idiocy by mind_of_delusion · · Score: 1

      [sorry for the english spelling errors !] It's obviously an abusive interpretation of the french law, as the lawyer of this young idiot has said (french site here : http://www.nextinpact.com/news...). The exact charge against this guy is "apologie d’acte de terrorisme", or apology for terrorism. The "tribunal correctionnel" (the instance for this kind of charges) has been really overzealous, but since it's the first time this kind of case is judged (AFAIK), the judgment was supposed to be an example (to their mind anyway).

  32. The 18-years old man by Mondor · · Score: 1

    TFA doesn't disclose the name of the innocent 18-years old man. So let me guess - Mohammad?

  33. Re:I don't think that means what you think that me by mind_of_delusion · · Score: 1

    Daesh is actually an insult to the Islamic state people. It's anti-terrorist not pro-terrorist.

    https://www.freewordcentre.com...

    The fact is that in all french media, the IS is named Daesh (before reading this new, I wasn't aware of the meaning of the word).

  34. Obvious by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    "21" in this context represents the number for the Cote d'Or, the French department, or province, where Dijon is located.

    I am not sure how obvious that definition of what 21 might mean in France given circumstances, however when I read it the first thing I thought of was:

    "Forever 21" which I thought might just be poking fun at IS...
    http://www.forever21.com/ca/de...