(We're putting the second season of our Emmy-winning HBO show online. Watch them here.)

In the fourth episode of the second season of VICE, correspondent Thomas Morton heads to Syria to take a look at the front line of the battle for a Kurdish state, and Vikram Gandhi traces the illicit rhino horn trade from Southern Africa to Vietnam.

[body_image width='963' height='595' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='ex-nato-soldiers-are-one-step-closer-to-officially-joining-the-war-against-isis-273-body-image-1421080017.png' id='17423']

Photo via VICE News documentary "The Islamic State"

As foreign fighters flood into Syria and Iraq to join the ranks of the Islamic State, a group of former professional soldiers—some from among the "most specialized units" of NATO militaries—say it's one more official step closer to helping Kurdish Peshmerga forces in their war against ISIS.

VICE Canada has learned that the 1st North American Expeditionary Force, recently established to help volunteer soldiers from the West effectively join Kurdish forces in Iraq and Syria, has received a successful application from the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) as a designated non-governmental organization (NGO).

The move effectively takes the group, which says it's composed of volunteers with combat experience as professional soldiers in western militaries, closer to assuming a role on the battlefields of northern Iraq outside the auspices of an official government force.

"Through liaison with the KRG we have achieved great success for aligning volunteers to truly bring positive gains to the region," said Ian Bradbury, one of the founders of the NAEF and a veteran with the Canadian Forces.

But when contacted about NAEF's successful application, the Canadian department of Foreign Affairs was less enthused with Canadian military volunteers venturing to Syria and Iraq to aid in the war effort against ISIS.

"The Government of Canada has long advised against all travel to Syria and Iraq," said a spokesperson with Foreign Affairs. "Canadians traveling to Syria and Iraq, including those who travel there to join local campaigns in the fight against ISIL, must do so at their own personal risk and must be aware that rescue missions in this dangerous area will not be conducted."

The spokesperson added that individuals interested in defending Canadian values in a war zone should be encouraged to "join the Canadian Armed Forces," instead of freelancing as soldiers with foreign militaries.

At the moment, Canadian CF-18s are dropping precision missiles and smart bombs on ISIS targets, as Canadian Special Forces operators train Peshmerga forces in the same region the NAEF plans to deploy.

VICE reviewed an official document provided by the NAEF from the KRG government giving the group NGO status for the period of one year. The KRG NGO has yet to respond to a request for comment on the NAEF from this reporter.

"This role aligns directly with current allied force capacity building operations in the region and is not assessed as a combat role," said Bradbury in another emailed statement, indicating the group will be training the Peshmerga.

The agreement does not appear to sanction the NAEF as a fully independent combat force within the Peshmerga, but establishes an official relationship between the growing volunteer force and the KRG.

According to Bradbury, among the more than 100 volunteers who have approached his organization eager to join the fight against ISIS, several come from the most highly trained units within NATO militaries and will provide indispensable expertise to Peshmerga fighters.

As it stands, the NAEF plans to provide "advisory services" on the battlefields of northern Iraq to help professionalize KRG security forces, known as the Peshmerga (which translates to "Those Who Face Death"), in their ongoing counter offensive and defensive war with ISIS.

Bradbury said the key will be training Peshmerga soldiers—currently waging a brutal war with ISIS forces—to "attain professionalization to NATO standards" in a laundry list of specializations including, "combined arms mission planning and oversight; command, control, and communications; urban tactics; vehicle, equipment, and armory maintenance; logistics management; law of war and human rights; and first aid and combat casualty care."

The Canadian veteran and leader of the NAEF, hopes the new status will raise its profile and help spur donors to finance the volunteer force to "ensure mission success," because it "relies on the generosity of donors." The NAEF claims it is not a private military contractor whatsoever, in the vein of Blackwater— which deployed private mercenaries for wealthy clients at the height of the Iraq War for profit.

In the same statement the NAEF made it clear it wasn't just receiving volunteer applicants with combat expertise, but from non-military professionals.

"(W)e are seeing Medical, Law Enforcement Officers, Fire Services, Logistics, Vehicle Technicians coming forward who are currently employed in the top of fields," said Bradbury in the same statement given to VICE.

[body_image width='564' height='557' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='ex-nato-soldiers-are-one-step-closer-to-officially-joining-the-war-against-isis-273-body-image-1421080234.png' id='17425']

Former Canadian Forces soldier Dillon Hillier. Photo via Facebook

With news that the NAEF will be contributing to the Kurdish effort against ISIS, it will add one more unit to an expanding list of Canadians already finding themselves on the battlefields of northern Iraq. Besides Dillon Hillier, a combat veteran from the CF already firing his assault rifle at ISIS forces, Gil Rosenberg—a woman from British Columbia and a former member of the Israeli Defence Force (IDF)—is also fighting with Kurdish PKK forces in Syrian Kurdistan.

Meanwhile, it's well-known that ISIS counts Canadians within its ranks. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) officially states that over 30 Canadian nationals currently fight with terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, some in the same region the NAEF intends to influence.

In other words, Canadian NAEF volunteers, or former western soldiers for that matter, could very well end up training the guns shooting at Canadian and foreign ISIS fighters.

Follow Ben on Twitter.

[body_image width='1500' height='1000' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='counter-terrorism-in-the-age-of-jesuischarlie-body-image-1421070593.jpg' id='17371']

Photo by Pete Voelker

This article originally appeared on VICE UK

In the wake of the horrific events in France last week, much has been made of the fact that both suspects were known to the authorities. The same kind of things were said about the killers of Lee Rigby, and about Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the Boston bombers.

Of course, the fact that the authorities were aware these people existed and could potentially be a threat ultimately made little difference; they were all able to plan and execute attacks without security agencies catching on until the events had taken place.

This raises a couple of questions: Is the mass data mining of the NSA and the GCHQ in the UK really that effective? And have those planning terror attacks changed their tactics now that the whole world knows there's probably someone listening in on their every conversation? I checked in with some professional anti-terror types to find out.

Dr. Steve Hewitt, a counter-terrorism expert at the University of Birmingham, provided a window into the effect the Paris atrocity has had on the security community. "There are short-term and long-term issues," he told me. "Short-term, the key is obviously not just to prevent future attacks but also to anticipate what form these might take. The recent 'norm,' if it can be called that, has been the 'lone actor' type attacks, including some experienced by France prior to Christmas. But now the concern is with what happened in Paris. However, this type of attack will probably remain more rare than the lone actor ones. First, there is the requirement of skill, time, planning, and greater dedication, and, with multiple participants, an increased possibility of detection."

Not to appear too self-interested, but this did make me wonder whether there are any major differences between the threats present in France and those in the UK.

Dr. Hewitt continued: "Significantly—and this is a key issue for me coming out of Wednesday—such attacks require weaponry. In the UK, obtaining weapons is not easy; and even if a weapon is obtained, getting access to ammunition is also no easy matter. Thus, having the aspiration to carry out an attack isn't sufficient if one does not possess the means.

"All of this means that lone actor attacks will likely remain the trend for the foreseeable future, which is generally a good thing because, although they're less likely to be detected, their ability to cause widespread casualties is also generally more limited. The long-term issue is to deter individuals from engaging in violent extremism, but determining how to do this and who to target is far from an exact science."

[body_image width='1000' height='667' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='counter-terrorism-in-the-age-of-jesuischarlie-body-image-1420823067.jpg' id='16987']

Michael Adebolajo, one of Lee Rigby's killers. Photo by Dan Giannopolous

The issues of suspect detection and tracking bring up serious questions about intelligence agencies and how they operate. Over the past few years—certainly since the Ed Snowden revelations—discussions of counter-terrorism strategies have focused on government spying, and in particular on the indiscriminate collection of "big data," i.e., the NSA and GCHQ trawling through everyone's phone calls, emails, and embarrassing browser histories.

There's been much debate about the civil liberties black hole these practices represent. Now it's time to figure out whether they even work.

I spoke to Dr. Gilbert Ramsay, of the Center for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at the University of St. Andrews. His answer was pretty emphatic: Basically, it's one thing to ask service providers to store data and then make it available to authorities so that they can conduct a focused enquiry based on pre-existing human intelligence leads. It's quite another thing to use it to actually uncover terrorists. "To my knowledge, all attempts at the latter have been unsuccessful, and sometimes laughably so."

This may be a slight understatement on Dr. Ramsay's part. The question should really be: Does fighting terrorism with semi-legal metadata ever actually work?

When called to defend the NSA spying program in front of a Senate Judiciary Committee, General Keith Alexander claimed that the agency's data mining had thwarted 54 terror attacks. But, on closer inspection, 53 of these claims turned out to be bullshit, and the General was left with only the case of Basaaly Moalin, a San Diego cab driver who, in 2008, managed to funnel just over $8,300 to someone affiliated with al-Shabaab.

This is particularly pertinent in relation to what happened on Wednesday. The attack on Charlie Hebdo was, more than anything else, an attack on the idea of the open society. That idea is threatened as much by spying in the name of security as it is by the guns of bigoted idiots. And if the spying isn't even delivering the security—well, then they're just taking the piss.

Either way, if—as Dr. Hewitt suggests—we're moving into an era of "lone wolf" attacks, counter terrorism through big data will become irrelevant by definition.

Hewitt went into some common-sense detail: "The smaller the number of attackers, the more difficult they are to detect," he said. "There's a greater awareness that movements can be tracked through mobile phones and communications can be intercepted... lone individuals or small groups can avoid the need for communication and their small numbers preclude infiltration."

He's also realistic about just how much we can really expect from the security services. "I'm not sure much can be done about this," he told me. "Counter-terrorism is always a form of triage, since in democratic societies there are not unlimited resources available to carry out round-the-clock surveillance on all potential suspects. There's no clear pattern to understand why person A becomes an angry extremist but remains peaceful, while person B becomes an angry extremist who engages in violence. The only solution is to watch both and, undoubtedly, one solution is to increase resources for counter terrorism. But even then, inevitably, someone will slip through the net."

This could be taken as frightening and depressing. Or maybe we just need to realize that, long-term, the most effective way to prevent terrorist attacks has less to do with the security services, and as much to do with us demonstrating clearly and defiantly that they don't work—that the open society will always triumph over the closed. Next week, Charlie Hebdo will publish a million copies of its magazine. Buy them. Share and re-share and flood the internet with every image they print.

The hashtag #jesuischarlie is ringing out just about everywhere. As is #jesuisahmed, in tribute to the Muslim gendarme who fulfilled Evelyn Beatrice Hall's injunction, dying to defend the right of others to say things he may not necessarily have agreed with himself.

For once, these online cyphers actually mean something.

[body_image width='700' height='430' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='the-global-fear-league-2015-831-body-image-1421052302.jpg' id='17281']

Collage by Marta Parszeniew

This article originally appeared on VICE UK

Once upon a time—so we are told—the world was a place of peace. Birds sang, rivers ran, there were caverns measureless to man (because man did not exist). Then that man arrived and he brought other men with him. The world changed. People huddled inside their nation states, worrying about what other people huddled in other nation states were planning to do to them.

Fear grew, at first because no one knew what was going on outside their village, and then because it was ramped up by media outlets/governments/your parents to the point where today, in 2015, the dark, semi-fathomable evils in this world come in so many different shapes, sizes, and hues that it's almost impossible to say which of them are fictional and which of them are real.

What that in mind, here's our annual Global Fear League—a guide to which countries everyone in the UK should be petrified of this year.

Disclaimer: I have at least one friend from each of these countries, so you can't accuse me of bias/racism. Secondary disclaimer: Every single friend I have from these countries is a biased racist.

SYRIA

[body_image width='960' height='608' path='images/content-images/2015/01/11/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/11/' filename='the-global-fear-league-2015-831-body-image-1421009671.jpg' id='17256']

Some British jihadists in Syria in their swimming pool. Photo via

The situation: Who is the good guy? Who is the bad guy? Is it just bad guys and more bad guys? Won't somebody please think of the Hollywood scriptwriters? I mean, the Islamic State (IS) has to be the bad guys because of all the awful things they do and because they look like health goth pirates. But then the Syrian government's indiscriminate barrel bombing campaign won't let up and Coalition airstrikes on IS positions are killing innocent Syrian civilians.

Is the Assad regime actually the John Wayne hero character because even though it kills innocent children (and everyone else), it's willing to help the West (which must be good) fight IS?

Danger rating: This is a pitiless war that shows no signs of ending, but whose victims are dying in their homes, languishing in refugee camps or drowning at sea. It's one of the main reasons that countries across Europe are reinforcing their borders, although if the stated motives of Paris gunman Amedy Coubilaly are to be believed, it's likely the West will continue to feel tremors from the awful situation in Syria.

UNITED STATES

The situation: The perpetual war for perpetual peace project continues abroad while, at home, a nation becomes more and more removed from its military, like a proud child who'd rather not think about what his father's been up to when he stumbles in smelling of booze after going AWOL for six days. Meanwhile, a cop's right to shoot who he likes is under attack.

Danger rating: When you live in the home of the free and the land of the brave, the price is constant vigilance. Other people are always trying to take these things away from you because they are jealous. The only real threat the US continues to pose to the UK, however, is to the British troops who are sent off to help out with their foreign wars.

SIERRA LEONE

The situation: The Ebola outbreak means that Sierra Leone is the latest country to simply be referred to as "Africa," less a nation state and more a waking nightmare written by Joseph Conrad featuring death, disease, an absence of rivers, an ignorance of Christmas, and a compelling desire to see you vomit worms until you die.

Danger rating: If we don't shut Africa Airport, we'll all catch Ebola and die.

[body_image width='991' height='659' path='images/content-images/2015/01/11/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/11/' filename='the-global-fear-league-2015-831-body-image-1421009339.jpg' id='17255']

Putin being really alpha. Photo via Flickr

RUSSIA

The situation: Say what you want about the tenets of Soviet Socialism, at least it was an ethos. Today's Russia, with its fondness for annexation, super-rich elites, and macho posturing... well, maybe nothing much has changed. At home, the population is terrified by the FSB secret police and a bewildering array of groups that all turn out to be sponsored by Putin.

On the international stage, expensively educated civilian leaders like David Cameron and Barack Obama wonder if it's a good idea trying to stand up to Putin when he may, in fact, be willing to order their killing.

Danger rating: Is anyone ever not afraid of Russians? They eat cake made out of herring voluntarily; imagine what else they're capable of.

ARGENTINA

The situation: Russia just offered Argentina some fighter jets in exchange for food.

Danger rating: THIS MEANS THEY WANT THE FALKLANDS BACK!

IRAQ

[body_image width='802' height='450' path='images/content-images/2015/01/11/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/11/' filename='the-global-fear-league-2015-831-body-image-1421008998.jpg' id='17254']

IS fighters. Still from our Islamic State documentary

The situation: It's beginning to look a lot like 1990, 1991, 1995-96, 1998, and also 2003-2011. IS now controls about a third of the country; millions of Iraqis have been internally displaced since the summer; the government's army has essentially collapsed since the fall of Mosul to IS; and the government itself appears to now be relying on Shia militias to do much of its fighting. These militias are kicking Sunnis out of their homes. I guess Iraq just can't govern itself, after all. Time for the US to bomb it some more. Perhaps then it'll finally understand democracy.

Danger rating: US military advisors are already on the ground and Special Forces are thought to be operating there again. Mind you, people talk wistfully of the Ottoman Empire—the last big proper Sunni Islamic state—these days, so perhaps it's got to get incredibly, horrifically bad before it gets better.

UNITED KINGDOM

The situation: A super-wealthy, powerful elite rule over a downtrodden populace who are at the point of not being able to take it any more. After calls for democratic reform swept the Arab world a few years ago, 2015 will be the year of the "British Spring."

Danger rating: In a few months, the population will choose which new leaders it wants and nothing will change.

[body_image width='750' height='500' path='images/content-images/2015/01/11/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/11/' filename='the-global-fear-league-2015-831-body-image-1421010152.jpg' id='17257']

Israeli soldiers arresting a Palestinian youth in the West Bank city of Hebron. Photo by Oren Ziv

ISRAEL

The situation: Benjamin Netanyahu, a man who only ever appears in public with a large Israeli flag behind him, has managed to see his regime's crackdown in Gaza get forgotten amid all this IS hype. Of course, everything's fine in Gaza now: The kids can play happily with the debris from airstrikes.

Danger rating: With all the fresh new horror erupting in nearby Syria and Iraq, the Israel-Palestine conflict is beginning to come across like Tom Cruise: no one has the heart to tell it that it's yesterday's man—and anyway, it'll all be over soon.

PAKISTAN

The situation: Allied forces are leaving Afghanistan, which must mean the war has been won and that Afghanistan is now a safe and prosperous country untroubled by the Taliban, corruption, or weak leadership. That means Pakistan, its larger, edgier neighbor, is the fear factory to focus on. It's got terrorists, drones, a hatred of India, and Imran Khan.

Danger rating: How could drones be dangerous when some of them have been designed to look like ladybirds?

NORTH KOREA

The situation: Something, something—impenetrable quasi-Soviet state—something, something—Kim Jong-un—something, something—nuclear weapons—something, something—James Franco.

Danger rating: High, if you're a North Korean with an anti-authoritarian streak. For the rest of the world—well, let's be honest, not that high. But people like to imagine it might be.

Follow Oscar on Twitter.

[body_image width='2000' height='1843' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='talking-charlie-hebdo-with-pastor-terry-jones-at-his-french-fry-stand-in-florida-111-body-image-1421027201.jpg' id='17269']

Photos by the author

Pastor Terry Jones—the evangelical Christian famous for burning Qurans, hanging effigies of Barack Obama, inciting riots in the Middle East, and denouncing radical Islam at every turn—now works with his two brothers at "Fry Guys Gourmet Fries" in the food court of a mall in Bradenton, Florida.

The pastor of Dove World Outreach Center, formerly located in Gainesville, Jones made international headlines in 2010 when he announced plans to burn a Quran on the ninth anniversary of 9/11 and was condemned by US officials, including President Obama. He went on to hold several more Quran burnings (he was arrested before he could set fire to a stack of 2,998 of the holy texts in 2013), has received countless death threats, and a $2.2 million bounty was placed on his head by al Qaeda affiliated groups in 2011.

I've had a few encounters with Jones before, having been in college in Gainesville when he sparked international outrage over that initial Quran burning. I stood in a room full of journalists a few years later when he pulled out a gun and fumbled with it, unable to remove the magazine.

He's not making as many headlines these days. The shopping centre is a relatively quiet mall, with both a "$1 Plus" store and a "$5 or less store." There's a dollar movie theater, a JC Penny, and a Hot Topic. The floors are tile and some of the ceilings glass, with pop music playing through the loudspeakers.

Jones's french fry stand is right on the corner of the small food court. It was jarring to see him standing there, in a casual blue shirt and jeans, working the fryer and taking orders—I've only ever seen him in a suit. He had the same handlebar mustache as always, but looked skinnier, and seemed relaxed.

I ordered fries and Jones joined me at the table. Colbie Caillat played on the speakers overhead.

He moved to Bradenton, Jones told me, because Gainesville is a "terrible place" and too liberal. He said his church is nearby, that he has two residences and a barn.

"It's in my nature to start something," he said of his french fry business, which he stared with his two brothers. "It's not in my nature to work for someone."

He's hoping to make it a franchise, and isn't worried about whether his fame will affect business. Jones just hopes this will help show that he won't stop living his life just because he's a wanted man.

"I hope that it's somewhat of an asset," he said, "for people that are tired of what is going on and want to speak out, and want to believe that someone will stand up, and take a chance, and speak out. People can support us by coming out to eat."

Does he worry al Qaeda could come and attack him at the mall?

"I think it's a possibility, sure. I think they could come to my house. You saw what they did there in Paris," he said. "They just went about shooting innocent people in the street, and then of course when they went into that office. So of course, they can be expected to do everything."

[body_image width='2000' height='1804' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='talking-charlie-hebdo-with-pastor-terry-jones-at-his-french-fry-stand-in-florida-111-body-image-1421027131.jpg' id='17268']

He's aware that he's a target just like the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists were. The Paris attack, Jones said, simply reinforces his views on Islam (he once wrote a book called Islam Is of the Devil). As a pastor, he wishes that all Muslims would convert to Christianity. But if you ask him that question as a citizen, the answer is a little different.

"If you're asking me as an American, then I have no problem with Islam—they are protected under the First Amendment," Jones told me. "I have no problem with them being in the country, building mosques, or evangelizing. I wish they would allow the same thing in Islamic dominated countries. They do not. I've always said of the Muslim community is that if they're in America, they must honor and obey the Constitution, and not try to institute sharia law, which they often try to do."

According to the Bradenton Herald, the Manatee County Sheriff's Office recently indicated they were unaware of any active threats against Jones. But he remains vigilant.

"I wouldn't say we are scared, but we definitely are very cautious," he told me. "I am always armed—always. And I'm very careful when I travel, when I go to the parking lot at night, and when I go home at night. I think al Qaeda and ISIS, well, it's a proven fact that they mean business. And it looks as though they are after those people on the hit list."

He said opening the fry stand is a way to express patriotism, a way to show that he's not going to back down, and that he's not going to go into hiding.

"People know how to get a hold of us," he said. "They know where we're at."

The fry stand stayed fairly busy while I was there (the people who ordered in front of me got chicken wings). I asked an older couple eating fries if they knew who was making their food.

Bob Koons and his wife, Jenny, from Bradenton, said that yes, they absolutely knew who Jones was, and supported him "150 percent."

"I have a gun," Koons said. "I think it's about time Americans stood up for something."

Were they worried about the possibility of a terrorist attack in the mall? No, Jenny Koons said. You have to live your life.

"An attack is always possible," she told me. "You can't dwell on that type of stuff. What am I going to do? Hide in my house?"

Jon Silman is a freelance journalist and fiction writer based in Florida. He has previously worked at the Miami Herald, Valley News, Gainesville Sun and Tampa Bay Times. Follow him on Twitter.

Artist Devin Troy Strother is on his way to becoming an art world MVP, though his own expectations are even higher: Michael Jordan status. "He's what I'm trying to reach with my work," Strother told me over a 12-pack of Miller High Life and a joint while we sat amidst pre-installed work for his new solo show, Space Jam, exhibiting at Marlborough Gallery's Chelsea location through February 14. "Jordan has surpassed identity and blackness. He's not 'the best black athlete,' he's the best athlete—this supreme entity."

While the 28-year-old Strother has achieved a level of success most artists never reach—multiple solo shows, critical acclaim, and even purchase inquiries from Kanye West—the over-the-top titles of his work and the suggestion from critics that he's in the lineage of black artists like Kara Walker often become the focal points of his creative output, and his own ideas become marginalized.

To be fair, Strother often uses black cut-outs with a minstrel-ish vibe like Walker, and past works include long, double-take-inducing names like "'My Mommas House Is So Contemporary, So Abstract That Shit Look Like a Morandi Tho,' said Keniecia to Shaniecia. 'This is my Mommas House When It Was Black.'" But he doesn't want to be known as a "black artist," and he sometimes wonders if certain buyers are swooping up his paintings just for the titles, even when they won't say their names out loud, as many of them include the word "nigga."

With his new exhibition, though, he's confronting these issues full-on by being as blatant as possible about identity issues and artistic comparisons. The floor of the gallery has been converted into a basketball court peppered with several giant, black marble monoliths. The monoliths are the most salient objects in the room, and could be viewed as black players on a court, but also black men and their changing status within the art world. Status issues also come into play with holographic canvases that resemble sought-after basketball cards and caps with iridescent stickers, as well as images of Jordan himself, trailed by streaks of color as if he's bursting through the light spectrum, or has the untouchable "on-fire" power from basketball video games like NBA Jams. As for the art-world comparisons, Space Jam includes titles like "Devin Troy Strother x Rob Pruitt x Cory Arcangel x Walead Beshty x A Sad Face x 0 Michael Jordans, 2014." The "Sad Face" may as well be a winking emoji.

Over the course of a night, Strother spoke with me about how racial identity is inherent in his work even when he doesn't want it to be, his biting (and hilarious) artwork titles, and why even KKK members love Michael Jordan.

[body_image width='1024' height='1544' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='artist-devin-troy-strother-is-no-michael-jordan-but-hes-becoming-an-art-world-all-star-111-body-image-1420839828.jpg' id='17094']

[body_image width='1200' height='1497' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='artist-devin-troy-strother-is-no-michael-jordan-but-hes-becoming-an-art-world-mvp-111-body-image-1421071991.jpg' id='17380']Strother, I got a Kelley Walker all over my MJ's (air walker part. ) what's the problem (email). (2014) Image courtesy of Marlborough Gallery.

VICE: In every interview with you I've read, someone always asks, "What's your art's relation to blackness?" And you'll say something like "I'm not trying to make black art or race-related art, it's already been done," and the response is always, "Well you're a privileged millennial." It's like you can't win.
Devin Troy Strother: That was all in relation to how I don't want to talk about slavery. I don't want to talk about black injustice. I don't even really want to talk about being black. But I'm going to have to talk about it. It's like this weird escapist thing where you try to make work that's not about identity, but making work that's not about identity is also about identity. So yeah, you can't win.

I feel like you're just a young dude who, like everyone roughly our age, is internet-addled. Post-modern logic is basically ingrained in our heads due to technology and the internet.
That's almost like an art canon standard for my generation of artists. There are already so many things we've seen and had to learn about. You regurgitate it in some way, shape, or form. Now it's like how deep or what's the most obscure reference you can make in your work that hasn't been referenced yet.

So I figured I might as well reference people who are referenced all the time because it's funny—or it just is what it is. I don't know if I'm jaded through the art world. When you start showing regularly, you realize you have to validate other artists through your practice. That's what certain critics want to hear. They validated so and so, so now you have to re-validate those creators as like a hat-tip or art world respect/influence thing. Be it David Hammons or John McCracken. So I'll just go out and say this is a take-out of John McCracken's practice or whatever. I like to be blatant about my references.

Is that a defense mechanism in a way? Like I know you've got a sense of humor, but it's almost like you're hanging a lantern on your problems before someone could call you out for implementing a similar style without name-checking the artist.
It's kind of like that. That's why the gradient paintings are like "Devin Troy Strother x Rob Pruitt x Cory Arcangel..." but that was also a reference to fashion. A couple years ago, everyone was doing Carhart x Neighborhood x whatever—all those fashion collabs.

I might have one of my own collabs like that next year. Me and Caleb Linsay got asked about showing in this specific Brooklyn art space next year. But I don't want to do it there because it'd have to be a black thing. I just know it. I was like, if we do the show we'll have to call it A Black Thing or Some Black Shit, or Two Niggas in a Gallery . [laughs]

That's another thing. Galleries will never let me use "Nigga" in the title of my shows. The first show I did at Marlborough was supposed to be called I Just Landed in Rome, Nigga , but they made me take out "Nigga." But when they sent out the press release, they forgot to take it out. I'm waiting for a gallery to let me use it in a show title because I use it in all my titles—all my titles have the word "nigga." That's a word that's not what it used to be. I don't even normally say it—only when I title my work.

So it is pointed?
It's super pointed. I went to private school my whole life and I'm this middle class black kid. I went to mainly all-white schools and hung out with Asian and Hispanic kids. I didn't grow up with black kids. I use it specifically because when I was younger, I'd date white girls and they'd say, "You're not like other black guys." And back then I thought that was cool. I was like, Fuck yeah, I'm different. I'm not offended even to this day to tell you the truth. I feel like my work is slightly about that.

Do you think your titles are necessary to understand or fully appreciate the work?
The titles for me are the punch line of the paintings. When I work, I usually have a podcast or a movie going—something like Marc Maron, Doug Benson, or another comedian. Comedy is very similar to making work, I feel. You build this identity, present it to people, and become somewhat vulnerable because they're coming to critique you. With comedy, it's about you and the viewer and they come to see you do this thing. With painting, people come to see this thing you're presenting and you only have a few ways to communicate the paintings to the viewer. The actual image, and then the title. So many artists say fuck off and put up "Untitled #1" and shit like that, or some weird title that doesn't relate to the work. I've always been into messing with that.

Most of the shit I look at these days is humor. Reddit, comedy podcasts, etc... I'm sick of everything else. I don't think it's because we're jaded, but it's a generational thing. We're so full of media, everything is media-driven. All my work is driven by media, pop-culture consumption. And comedy is what always catches my attention amongst the shit.

[body_image width='1544' height='1024' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='artist-devin-troy-strother-is-no-michael-jordan-but-hes-becoming-an-art-world-all-star-111-body-image-1420839910.jpg' id='17096']

[body_image width='1200' height='1493' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='artist-devin-troy-strother-is-no-michael-jordan-but-hes-becoming-an-art-world-mvp-111-body-image-1421071652.jpg' id='17377']Strother, Devin Troy Strother x Rob Pruitt x Cory Arcangel x Walead Beshty x A Sad Face x 9 Michael Jordans (email), (2014). Image courtesy of Marlborough Gallery.

How would you describe your work to someone who's never seen it before and doesn't know the titles?
I would want to try and articulate it without using the word black, but I don't think that's possible. I would have to talk about race because it's definitely something that's apparent in the work, even if I don't want it to be about race. This is always a hard question because I don't want to say black and I'm trying to articulate it without talking about identity. I don't want to talk about identity but it's definitely about identity. It's so much about identity.

I'm talking about what it's like to make work as a young black artist now, and be born in a post-post-post racial society. To come up being the only black kid in school, the only cool kid because I was the only black guy. Like the Gerald [from Hey Arnold! ], you know? It's about living in that type of experience. I didn't have a negative experience being black so I make work that's... I'd say it's just American.

But the art is still about your America, it's about you and it is personal.
It's super personal, though not as personal as past work where I was literally referencing specific moments in my life. It's really all the things I try not to say it is. But this is kind of what keeps me making work. I'm always trying to articulate this ineffable thing I'm thinking about and living through. Every show is a failed show in a way—you never get it right.

Even with this one, there's so much shit I wanted to do but didn't get around to it. I wanted to do these paintings where I'd get the jersey mesh material and stretch it over a canvas and paint on that and have that be the canvas.

There's that piece "'Just a Bunch of Niggas in Space' Reedited (Tell That Nigga Jordan, He Made a Mess Trying to Be Gerhard Richter)." That title is super interesting because it's like Jordan tried doing something outside basketball but ended up fucking up because of the social, creative, or racial constructs and boundaries we live with. Or like he tried it, but it can only be compared to so and so.
Yes, totally. But those also relate to the video game NBA Jam. You know when you get on fire and you get the trail behind you where you're untouchable. It's him making a slam dunk and he has this color gradient coming behind him where he's breaking through sound and light.

And he's got infinite zoom.
Totally. And he's got the MJ tongue sticking out. The faces were based on the dunk face.

[body_image width='1200' height='801' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='artist-devin-troy-strother-is-no-michael-jordan-but-hes-becoming-an-art-world-all-star-111-body-image-1420840663.jpeg' id='17100']
Strother, just a bunch of niggas in space reedited (tell that nigga jordan, he made a mess trying to be gerhard richter) (detail 1), 2014. Courtesy of Marlborough Gallery.

[body_image width='1062' height='911' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='artist-devin-troy-strother-is-no-michael-jordan-but-hes-becoming-an-art-world-mvp-111-body-image-1421071788.jpg' id='17379']

But why Jordan? He's the superbrand and all but...
He's what I'm trying to reach with my work. Jordan, to me, is the pinnacle black person. People love him, and it's never that he's black, it's because he's the greatest player. He's surpassed identity and blackness. He's not "the best black athlete," he's the best athlete—this supreme entity. If you're white, Asian, whatever: everyone wants to be like Michael Jordan. I feel like there are KKK members who'd say Michael Jordan is the shit.

It's funny because this body of work, more of my family and friends were into it and connected with it. That feels so much better: making work that an everyday viewer can come in and feel some connection to it, as opposed to some weird elitist shit. If the gallery were just filled with the monoliths, then it'd be such a jerk move.

I feel like I failed trying to get across the message I wanted to get across. Trying to make this correlation between the commodity and status of sports, of art, of people. It's similar to that correlation I was making between painting and comedy. It's all just this performance. Instead of playing basketball—that thing like, "To get out the hood you better rap or play ball"—this is like my basketball in the gallery mentality. Like, I'm a black dude talking about playing ball, but in the art gallery.

Space Jam is open at Marlborough Chelsea through February 14th. For more information, visit the gallery website here.

Follow Zach on Twitter.

Philip Eure has one of the most challenging positions in the country, if not the world.

As the first inspector general (IG) for the New York City Police Department, his job is to reform America's largest municipal law enforcement agency at a time when the cops and mayor are publicly beefing and the Black Lives Matter movement is still simmering.

Since taking office this spring after the City Council created the position in 2013, Eure, the former oversight chief of the Washington DC police, has stayed on the sidelines of the debate over policing that has consumed much of the country. While slowly amassing a 50-person team, Eure reportedly (yet quietly) met with the mayor's office, NYPD brass, and the mothers of police brutality victims in an effort to find out what could be done about New York's finest.

Now, as we seem to be nearing the end of a citywide policing slowdown, the man in charge of independently monitoring and reforming New York cops is making his move.

In its first ever report, the Office of the Inspector General dedicated 45 pages to an initial target: choke holds. The aggressive use of force was infamously implemented by Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the takedown of Eric Garner on Staten Island this July. (According to the medical examiner, the tactic is what led to his death.) The practice—which is prohibited in the NYPD handbook—has since led the City Council to draft a bill banning the move altogether, but the problem, according to the IG, is what we tend to see happen (or not happen) after a choke hold is used.

Analyzing ten cases between 2009 and 2014, all of which involved the banned procedure, the IG found that choke hold complaints are routinely lost in the abyss of the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) and Internal Affairs Bureau, both of which are institutions within the NYPD that are supposed to be watching the cops. (It's worth noting that the official penalties for using a choke hold range from undergoing retraining to losing vacation days to termination. Officer Pantaleo is currently facing departmental charges, but given the NYPD's track record, it's unlikely he'll lose his job.)

"After the tragic death of Eric Garner, and intense scrutiny of choke holds, OIG-NYPD conducted a deep dive into cases involving this prohibited tactic to explore and demystify how these complaints are addressed internally," Eure says in the report. "Our targeted analysis revealed troubling deficiencies from the top-down that must be rectified."

Those deficiencies strike at the core conflict of interest in the idea of self-enforcement—basically, cops watching over other cops. For instance, the IG found that, for reasons unknown, six cases under the jurisdiction of former Police Commissioner Ray Kelly saw him intervene to either lessen the CCRB's recommendations of penalties against the particular officer or toss them out altogether.

"We really don't know why the police commissioner came out with a different result, a lesser result than the CCRB recommended," Eure told WNYC on Monday morning. "That sort of thing undermines confidence."

(It's worth noting that current NYPD Commissioner William J. Bratton recently told CNN that what we saw in the Garner video was not a choke hold, after initially conceding it looked like one. "It appears to be a choke hold—as we understand it, [it] wasn't," he said.)

The IG also argues that the definition of what constitutes a choke hold, the evidence needed to prove one took place, and communication about the tactic—at the precinct, borough, and higher levels of the Department—varies among the NYPD's internal agencies. The CCRB has consistently failed to tell internal affairs about choke hold complaints, even though it is required to do so by law.

In the end, the picture painted by the report is one of bureaucrats falling over each other—confusion at every tier of power. Whether on purpose or not, accountability measures and the complaints themselves are left by the wayside.

Of course, the internal agencies' incompetence has become an unspoken rule of New York City politics—a reality of internal bureaucracy that city residents, especially those involved in serious police brutality cases, have been used to for some time. Many relatives of victims I've spoken with say "internal investigation" with an exhausted tone of voice that implies guaranteed failure. If something "goes to the CCRB" or cops say they're "doing an internal investigation," that usually means essentially nothing will happen to the officers involved. That's another reason Eure's office, which was given subpoena power among other legal enforcement tools, exists in the first place.

Finally, the IG touches upon officers' communication skills training, which indirectly gets at a central question of the Black Lives Matter protests: What did Eric Garner do to instigate a choke hold? "In several of the cases, officers escalated to force too quickly—in many instances as a first act of physical force in response to verbal resistance," Eure writes, calling officers' tendency to use a choke hold "alarming." On this note, Mayor Bill de Blasio has announced a total retraining of the boys in blue, which will heavily focus on de-escalation.

To fix this mess, the IG office's recommendations are basically an amalgam of "Stop doing that!" gestures: improved communications and information-sharing among agencies; transparency in decisions made by the commissioner, especially when they run contrary to the CCRB; and general reform of how the NYPD disciplines its officers when they defy the handbook.

In addition to looking into post-9/11 surveillance, handling mentally ill suspects, and " broken windows" policing theory in its entirety, Eure's office will also work on releasing a full, comprehensive review of excessive use of force in the coming months. The idea is to consider more systemic issues rather than individual instances of police brutality. After all, that's his main responsibility here: finding out not only why these things happen, but why they continue to happen.

According to the inspector general, the NYPD must submit a formal response to its proposals within 90 days—a detailed blueprint to show exactly how the Department plans on fixing its own problems. But Newsday reported on Monday that NYPD officials have yet to read the report, nor are they willing to comment on it. (The NYPD did not respond to VICE's request for comment.)

However, given the news of cops turning their backs on the mayor and drastically reducing the number of arrests they make, what will be most important is how Eure is received by the department he's charged with overseeing. The release of this report itself was delayed due to the deaths of officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos in Bed-Stuy—a tragic event that paused the policing debate in New York City, at least momentarily.

Still, it seems as if Eure is determined to push ahead, and that he might even have the clout to nudge the cops into changing their ways.

In a letter to the mayor, the City Council, and Police Commissioner Bratton, Mark Peters—the former civil rights lawyer who picked Eure for the inspector general gig—struck a balance between praising cops and promising change to reformers.

"The NYPD is among the most professional and best trained police forces in the world," he wrote. "To suggest otherwise is to forfeit participation in the reasoned debate about the future of policing. However, neither the NYPD's virtues and successes, nor its acknowledged importance to our civic life, should be used to prevent a discussion of genuine problems. One can respect the NYPD and still seek to address the legitimate concerns of the communities it serves."

Follow John Surico on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE UK

As the events surrounding the Charlie Hebdo massacre unfolded last week, social media exploded with people calling for Muslims to dissociate themselves from the attack. Naturally, a debate ensued discussing whether or not it was necessary for an entire religion to collectively distance itself from the acts of a few lone extremists.

We asked our European offices to reach out to local Muslim community leaders and get their opinions on last week's events.

FRANCE

[body_image width='800' height='534' path='images/content-images/2015/01/10/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/10/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420884581.jpg' id='17149']

Dalil Boubakeur at France's presidential inauguration ceremony, 2012. Photo via Wikicommons

In the wake of Wednesday's tragic events, hundreds of caricaturists from all around the world paid tribute to those who had fallen during the attacks by posting drawings on social networks. Unfortunately, Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff rightfully predicted that the whole French Muslim community would be one of the collateral victims of this attack, after stating that the "gunmen made a great contribution to the Islamophobia in France and around Europe."

Right after the events, Europe has indeed seen a wave of hateful comments asking for Muslims to "apologize for extremists." On Wednesday night, during a radio show on the French station RTL, a writer from Le Figaro (France's biggest right-wing newspaper) named Ivan Rioufol asked all Muslims to "dissociate themselves from the attack and [from this] terrorist craziness," to which Muslim journalist Rokhaya Diallo responded: "When I hear people saying that Muslims should dissociate themselves from a barbaric act, yes, I feel like a target. I feel like all of my family and Muslim friends are put in the dock. [...] Do you really think that I feel united with these terrorists? Should I be the only one [of the journalists attending the show] that should be forced to say I don't have anything to do with this?"

In 2006, several French Muslim associations, including the French Council of the Muslim Faith (CFCM), requested the seizure of the Charlie Hebdo issue featuring the controversial Muhammad cartoons first published by Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Despite their call for conviction of Charlie Hebdo, the Paris court dismissed the case. After Wednesday's attack, current president of the French Council of the Muslim Faith Dalil Boubakeur expressed his solidarity with the victims. "The Muslim community is dumbfounded by what happened on Wednesday," he said. "An entire section of our democracy was just attacked. This is a sensational declaration of war. Times have changed, we are entering a new period of confrontation."

All over the country, local imams have expressed their sadness and anger. Hassen Chalgoumi, an imam from Drancy (a Parisian suburb), told BFM "their hatred has nothing to do with Islam. [...] They lost their soul, sold it to the devil. Families are crying, French people are crying. We must be strong and united."

§

SPAIN

[body_image width='769' height='525' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420839792.jpg' id='17092']

Islamic Cultural Center of Madrid. Photo via Wikicommons

The two most important Islamic centers of Spain, Madrid, and Barcelona, have quickly sided with the victims of the attack.

"The Center's management, the imam, the employees, and the people who come here to pray, strongly condemn this criminal act in all of its aspects. These criminal acts are rejected by Islam, all religions, all human values, and all ethics," said the imam of the Islamic Cultural Center of Madrid.

In Barcelona, we got in touch with Salim Benamara, imam of the Catalan Islamic Cultural Center. We asked him if they had felt any hostility after the attack or had received any criticism from the local community. He told us: "Of course not. We are members of this community and are fully integrated in Catalonia. We regret the attacks in France and pray for the victims. In fact, two of them were Muslim. We haven't felt any rejection and we think that's logical; we have nothing to do with those people. If a Buddhist kills someone, do they blame the rest of the world's Buddhists? Do the Jews living here have any liability for the crimes of the State of Israel? I don't think so. This case is the same."

§

GERMANY

[body_image width='1024' height='683' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420839971.jpg' id='17097']

Imam Benjamin Idriz. Photo via Wikicommons

German imams and the Central Council of Muslims in Germany have all condemned the attacks. Imam Benjamin Idriz told the Newspaper TZ: "We, as a Muslim community, distance ourselves from these terrorists. They are both lunatics and criminals."

When asked whether this attitude renders him a target for fundamentalists, he says he hasn't received any threats so far, though Muslims should be afraid of "lunatics" like these. He added that the fact that most victims in Iraq and Syria were Muslims clearly shows, "terror knows no religion."

Idriz does fear that Muslims might be under general suspicion now and that the far-right and Islamophobes will misuse the attacks to promote their hate against Muslims. He says: "We will need to protect our buildings better now," but also thinks it's up to the Muslim community to open up more and interact with their surrounding communities. "Imams and parish councils alike need to formulate concepts for preventing extremist tendencies within their communities."

§

SERBIA

[body_image width='642' height='960' path='images/content-images/2015/01/10/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/10/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420883891.jpg' id='17147']

Head of the Islamic Community of Serbia, Muhamed Jusufspahic. Photo via

Serbia's Muslim community comprises only 3.1 percent of the country's 7.6 million population. Since the 90s, and the end of the war in the former Yugoslavia, there have luckily been no inter-ethnic or religiously motivated acts of violence.

Head of the Islamic Community of Serbia, Muhamed Jusufspahic, yesterday released an official press statement in response to the Charlie Hedbo incident:

''Cause is worse than consequence. And cause is the reason for consequence. The cartoons of Muhammad were drawn neither by friends of Muslims, nor by supporters of free speech. However, the journalists of Charlie Hebdo were neither killed by the friends of Muslims, nor the supporters of freedom of expression."

§

ROMANIA

[body_image width='1600' height='1067' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420840138.jpg' id='17098']

A Muslim woman pays her respects at the French Embassy in Bucharest.

Of approximately 20 million people living in Romania, roughly 65,000 of those are Muslim, making them one of the smallest minorities in the country. For hundreds of years there's been relative peace, with Muslims living unhindered, side by side with Christians. However, after the attacks in Paris, many Muslims fear that the way they are viewed may change for the worse.

"Our Muslim daughters have started becoming afraid to walk the streets," we were told by Demirel Gemaledin, the President of the Islamic Centre in Bucharest." Two sisters told me personally that, 'We're afraid that somebody will attack us for what those so-called Muslims have done.' It's easier to recognize girls as Muslim than men, because of the scarf and the clothing they wear."

§

AUSTRIA

[body_image width='820' height='544' path='images/content-images/2015/01/10/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/10/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420884023.png' id='17148']

Photo via the Islamic Faith Community of Austria

There's more than half a million Muslims here in Austria. The country has never been the target of any terror attack or other such incident of crime relating to religious extremism. Nevertheless, there are politicians like HC Strache, of the right-wing party FPÖ, who portray all Muslims as criminals and terrorists. Since the assault on the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris, these people have been using the tragic event to fuel the population's fears.

The Islamic Faith Community In Austria released a statement distancing themselves from the events in Paris: "With revulsion and horror, the Islamic Faith Community condemns the devastating terror attack on the office of the French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo. Our sympathy goes out to the relatives of the 12 people killed and the ten people badly wounded."

Furthermore, they added that "freedom of speech is a basic principle of democracy and neither religious views nor the expression of a controversial opinion can justify violence."

§

SWEDEN

[body_image width='837' height='734' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420841079.jpg' id='17104']

Uppsala mosque, which was recently the target of an arson attack. Photo via Wikicommons.

"This is horrible. It's awful, and difficult to describe with words. Why would anyone do such a thing? It's an assault on people, on democracy, and on society," Imam Ibrahim Hamad of the Islamic Association in Dalarna told local newspaper Dalarnas Tidningar.

In an official statement released on Wednesday, the Islamic Association of Sweden agreed with French President François Hollande, expressing how important it is to "unite and stand against all kinds of fanaticism and terrorism." They also warned that they "encourage Muslims in Sweden to be careful" due to there being "an increasing risk of anti-Muslim hate crime."

Sweden has experienced three arson attacks upon mosques over the last few weeks. The latest happened in Uppsala, when a Molotov cocktail was thrown at a mosque on New Year's Day.

"In Sweden, we've had an issue with increasing hate crime toward Muslim communities throughout 2014. This has definitely not decreased since the terror attack in Paris. We see serious threats throughout social media, all directed toward Muslims and Muslim communities. Central leaders of extreme political parties are generalizing Muslims, which may convince people to consider their accusations as accurate and direct their hatred and violence at the Muslim community as a whole," Omar Mustafa, Chairman at the Islamic Association of Sweden, told VICE.

"We need to gather our strengths and abilities from all directions—all religions and all political parties—and unite against the hatred."

§

POLAND

[body_image width='726' height='481' path='images/content-images/2015/01/10/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/10/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420884955.jpg' id='17150']

Nidal Abu Tabaq, Mufti of the Muslim League of Poland. Photo via

"Like everyone, I condemn all acts of violence and aggression," Youssef Chadid, imam and Head of the Muslim Cultural and Educational Center in Poznan, told VICE.

"All problems can be resolved peacefully, but for that to work, you need goodwill on both sides. Using violence is an easy way to show your strength. All true Muslims around the world condemn the attack on Charlie Hebdo."

When asked whether or not he, as a Muslim, felt threatened after the Paris attacks, he replied: "Personally, as a Muslim, I feel threatened due to the fact that society sees all Muslims as evil and generalizes us."

His opinions on the shootings were echoed by Nidal Abu Tabaq, Mufti of the Muslim League of Poland: "I feel disgusted by this act. It was murder carried out with premeditation and cruelty. Such people can safely be called terrorists. These people acted in no way in accordance with the principles of Islam. They acted contrary to the principles of Islam. The thoughts of such people are completely foreign to Islam."

§

DENMARK

[body_image width='600' height='450' path='images/content-images/2015/01/10/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/10/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420885260.jpg' id='17151']

Prayers at Peter Ipsens Vej. Photo via

Islam is the second-largest religion in Denmark, with Muslims making up 4.6 percent of the population. With elections coming up soon, the attacks on Charlie Hebdo have fueled political debate here at home. Fatih Alev, president of the Danish Islamic Center, fears that some politicians will use this week's incidents to distort the truth into political propaganda.

"The political debate can become fringed, with the consequence being that many citizens will become increasingly polarized," he told VICE. "This clash of Islamic values on one hand and good democratic Danish traditions on the other will blur the lines. I've openly criticized Lars Løkke Rasmussen (former Prime Minister of Denmark) because he wanted Danish Muslims to publicly dissociate themselves from the events in Paris. I strongly believe that you shouldn't blame some citizens of a certain religion, just because some fools yell 'Allahu Akbar!' before massacring innocent people."

§

UK

[body_image width='635' height='421' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420840239.jpg' id='17099']

Anjem Choudary speaking at a rally in Britain. Photo by Henry Langston

Britain is no stranger to attacks by fringe extremists being used to whip up ethnic tension, so Muslim leaders here were unsurprisingly quick to publicly condemn the shooting of 12 staff at the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris on Wednesday. Dr. Shuja Shafi, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said, "Nothing is more immoral, offensive, and insulting against our beloved Prophet than such a callous act of murder. Our thoughts, prayers, and solidarity go to the families of the victims and the people of France."

Another group of 15 UK imams released a statement saying, "cold-blooded murder such as this is the antithesis of Islam and its tenets."

Unfortunately, controversial London imam Anjem Choudary, who is notorious for saying the most extreme thing he can get away with, wrote a letter published on USA Today entitled "People Know the Consequences," which suggested he sees the shootings as understandable, if not justified.

Choudary's letter resulted in a run in with conservative American television host Sean Hannity on Fox News on Wednesday night. Hannity accused Choudary of supporting the attack, which Choudary denied. Despite this, Hannity concluded, "I still think you're an evil SOB," to which Choudary retorted, "I think you need to look in the mirror, Sean." It made good—if slightly sickening—entertainment, but begged the question of why either of them are allowed air time to comment at all.

§

BENELUX

[body_image width='700' height='525' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420839597.jpg' id='17091']

Dutch Muslims in prayer. Photo via Wikicommons

There is just as much diversity among Muslims in the Netherlands as there are opinions on how Muslims should react to events like the Charlie Hebdo attack. While some feel that Muslim organizations and mosques should publicly denounce the attacks, a vocal group of young Muslims, tired of having to distance themselves from terrorists they have nothing to do with, have stood up.

Imam Yassin Elforkani says that criticizing terrorist acts is the duty of any Muslim.

"Muslims are just as responsible for a solution to the problem as everyone else. Everyone is denouncing these attacks, and therefore we are too. It is the duty of a Muslim to denounce any form of violence."

The Mayor of Antwerp invited an imam, a bishop, and a rabbi to make a joint statement against fear and violence. "We condemn any violence, especially in the name of ideology or religion," Imam Saïd Aberkan said. The Mayor of Rotterdam, Achmed Aboutaleb, was firm in his tone against Muslims who don't agree with the values of Western society: "All people, including so many Muslims, want to build a free and open society here. And if you don't agree with that, then I say: get lost."

Yassin Elforkani is the spokesperson for CMO (Contact Body for Muslims and Government), a Muslim lobbying group whose opinion is often sought by the media and the government in public debates. But not all Muslims feel represented by CMO. "Muslims who sympathize with the terrorists have threatened me and called me a traitor and a deserter."

But Elforkani is undeterred by the threats. "We have to be firm against people who want to curb our freedom by violence. We can't let fear guide us."

§

GREECE

[body_image width='812' height='525' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420839879.jpg' id='17095']

Greek Muslims during prayer. Photo by Thodoris Nikolaou

In Greece, these tragic events have stunned the entire society. But for Muslims living in Greece, the attack has to be seen within the context of wider anti-immigrant sentiment, which has been extremely prevalent since the beginning of the country's financial recession.

"The attack against Charlie Hebdo is abominable. There is no justification for terrorism. Being a member of civil society, we must maintain resolve and stick to our values," declared Ahmed Moavia, founder of the Greek Forum of Migrants, "one being our freedom of speech and opinion, just as we must stand up against evil and violence that would deny such freedom of speech."

The Muslim community in Greece is shocked, angered, saddened, and devastated by Wednesday's events, Achemt Moavia told VICE: "The attack may well be exploited to justify anti-immigrant sentiment, and this indeed has already begun. But we have not received threats or hateful comments as a result of the attack, as of yet. The reason is, Europe, in some ways, is still a long way away," suggested Moavia. "We must remember that Greece does not have a large Muslim community—there are no third- or fourth-generation Muslims living here. Our problems stem from our history."

Attacks on Muslim prayer houses and impromptu mosques are commonplace in Greece, claimed Naim Elghandour, President of the Muslim Association of Greece. "There have been many attacks by extremist groups in Greece, against both Muslims and immigrants. Recently, a group of far-right extremists attempted to burn down a prayer space in northern Athens."

"We don't expect that we will be affected directly as a result of the attack in Paris," Moavia maintained. "Anti-immigrant violence has been on the rise since support for the radical right grew at the beginning of the recession—but it isn't explicitly anti-Muslim violence."

§

ITALY

[body_image width='960' height='720' path='images/content-images/2015/01/10/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/10/' filename='how-the-muslim-communities-of-europe-reacted-to-the-charlie-hebdo-massacre-184-body-image-1420883750.jpg' id='17146']

UCOII meeting in Verona, 2014. Photo via

According to the most recent IPSOS Mori survey, Muslims make up about 4 percent of the Italian population. Since the outbreak of the shootings, Muslims in Italy have harshly condemned them. In Perugia, a city in central Italy, the imam declared that the perpetrators "do not represent Islam nor the teachings of the Qu'ran," and that the attack damages the whole Muslim community.

The major Islamic associations in Italy condemned the massacre, too. A group called CAIM, operating in northern Italy, issued a statement saying that the gunmen's horrible deeds are to be considered "blasphemy" and that Italian Muslims will stay "united and strong in defense of legality, security, and peaceful coexistence of different cultures and religions."

The most prominent Islamic association in Italy, UCOII (League of the Islamic Communities in Italy), issued a press release declaring their "anger" against "this bloody crime," and expressing their hope that European Muslims will not be subjected to "another unfair criminalization."

At the time of writing there have been no attacks to mosques or Islamic centers in Italy as a result of the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Still, some right-wing parties are taking advantage of the Paris bloodshed to callfor a suspension in the construction of Milan's mosque, saying, "We won't let people in Milan be endangered this way."

Main photo courtesy of Megan Koester.

We're all addicted to social media, but the ways we use it continue to become more diverse.

Although the major social media platforms remain Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, the popularity of new platforms that use anonymity as a selling point, like YikYak, have seen tremendous growth in the past year. Snapchat's emphasis on impermanence helped it to become the fastest growing app overall, according to a recent study published on Techcrunch. That same study found Tumblr was the fastest growing social media platform out there, probably because of all the reblogs of weird GIFs and slash art. That's just what the kids are into.

One major drawback to the social media giants—Facebook and Twitter—is how vulnerable users are to unwanted attention. It's always a bummer to see Aunt Linda crash a perfectly good comment thread on Facebook, and equally a bummer to get trolled by random followers after you post a joke on Twitter. (Not to mention how depressing it is to see that apparently all of your friends are always doing better than you in every aspect of life.)

Where can we go to feel comfortable on social media? Where do you have the most fun? Which is the biggest necessity? And in the end, is it all just another means for advertisers to pitch products to you?

VICE contributors Grant Pardee and Alison Stevenson spoke with Matt Ingebretson, a comedian and writer for the Soup's web content, to talk about all that.

Producer: Sam Varela

Engineer: Jorge Reyes

Music: LA FONT

Follow the ENTITLEMENT Podcast on Twitter.

On Saturday night at Melbourne's Etihad stadium, 5,000 people attended the second installment of the Darts Invitational Challenge. This was an international darts event attracting some of the world's best sportsmen, but just before 9 PM it disintegrated into a beer-powered riot. Hundreds of young men in novelty costumes body slammed each other and Etihad's plastic furniture, 40 cops had to show up to restore order, and Premier Daniel Andrews condemned the destruction as "not the sort of major events we want in our city."

To get a better picture of what happened we spoke to someone on the scene. Meagan (not her real name) went along with a friend expecting a dull night, only to find herself in the middle of a riot.

VICE: Set the scene, what did it look like when you arrived?
Meagan: Well the setup was similar to a boxing match. One player was announced by the commentator and they'd come out high-fiving all the fans. You know that guy who says and in the left corner... they had that guy. Then the player got to the stage where there was a darts board and took their shot. It was calm when I first arrived, but I was told by everyone it would get rowdier.

What was the first sign things were getting out of hand?
Around eight o'clock I realized how drunk everyone was. These blank signs were sitting on the tables for people to write whatever they wanted. People were writing all sorts of tasteless stuff—"I've got a boner" and "I love sluts." The guy with that sign had a big grin on his face. His mom must be so proud. And maybe I don't go out enough, but every single man and his dog was hitting on me. They were very funny if you can stomach it, but there was also just something wrong with them all.

Etihad said the venue was only serving mid-strength beer. Why was everyone so drunk?
I don't think it was the beer. I think it was just the culture. You put a whole bunch of young sort of drunk guys in with plastic furniture and darts, what do you expect? But maybe I just don't take darts seriously.

When did it really go wrong?
It was about 8:45. I saw a few guys lifting each other up onto tables. Then I saw a bunch of guys cheering in a circle. I wasn't sure what was going on but when I got closer I saw they were watching guys body slam each other. They were also putting tables in the middle, taking turns leaping onto them and breaking them. There wasn't any security there yet. I think they were on the outskirts and I think they were fearing for their safety. It got big really quickly and I think they were a bit nervous.

How big?
There would have been a couple of hundred people, easily. It started with a few tables and then the circle got bigger and suddenly beer was flying everywhere. And cups and then more tables, and then more chairs. People were throwing each other onto piles of chairs. Everything was just flying. I had to look up the whole time to make sure nothing would land on me.

Was it violent?
It wasn't actually violent. There was just a big group of guys play-fighting. No one was angry or was going to start a fight. They were all just dressed up, thinking they were superheroes. When I was in the mix, there was actually a few of them taking care of me. There was one guy dressed up as Jesus who was especially looking out for me. I'm not religious, but it was nice to have Jesus with me.

What were you doing?
I was going around the edges, trying to keep out of the way. I wasn't scared because it was dangerous but not aggressive. Finally, security showed up when they ran out of chairs and tables. It was funny, this young security guard yelled, "Guys, stop throwing chairs!" He thought he'd bring the whole thing under control. Actually, the fact was that there were only about 15 of them and they were just young and looking nervous. They just didn't know what they were doing.

How was the rest of the crowd responding?
They weren't impressed. I heard a few people say, "What a bunch of hooligans. There was nothing like this last year and this is embarrassing." They just wanted to watch the game but it had all stopped. The players went offstage and, so I hear, and they weren't impressed.

How did it end?
Finally the police came in with pepper spray. I got scared because I didn't want to be involved with that. They didn't use it though. Just some announcer got on the stage and said, "Come on guys, we want to get the game back on but we can't because of safety issues. Let's all just calm down." People started pulling chairs out of the piles and sitting on them in a sign that they wanted the game to start again. The whole fight lasted about half an hour but that's a long time for chair throwing.

So what was the image that stayed in your mind?
Chairs flying. And beer. I was just covered in beer. I stank. I had to come home and wash my hair at one o'clock in the morning. My husband was disgusted. He didn't know what happened in there until I showed him some photos.

So what did you learn about darts?
Only that I was right. I thought it would be this big bogan [Aussie slang for lower-class people] event and I was right. Also it was more the younger guys who were mainly causing the trouble. And at the start Simon the Wizard (a famous Australian darts player) was still playing. I thought, How can he concentrate with this happening? That was impressive.

Follow Julian on Twitter.

[body_image width='1855' height='2776' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='dennis-hoff-is-making-books-sexy-again-789-body-image-1421085872.jpg' id='17444']

Cover courtesy of Regan Arts

When Moonlite BunnyRanch owner Dennis Hof releases his new memoir, The Art of the Pimp, on March 17, it will mark the debut of Regan Arts—a new imprint headed by Judith Regan, the publishing legend behind Wicked, O. J. Simpson's If I Did It, and critically acclaimed fiction like The Zero. Hof's book is a hell of a way to start a publishing venture; it opens with a description of how meeting Marilyn Monroe as a child gave him his first boner ("If you want to know about my first erection, and I'm sure you do, this is the story," he writes), and goes on to explain how he became the owner of the most famous legal brothel in America. He discusses how his controlling mother motivated him to become a live-and-let-live business owner, how SCREW publisher Al Goldstein became his "father figure," and how he became best friends with porn star Ron Jeremy. (Hof and Jeremy sleep in a bed together, and Hof uses female pronouns to refer to Jeremy.)

As is Regan's trademark, the memoir is packaged as a frenetic mix of lowbrow and highbrow culture. Richard Ljoenes has illustrated a beautiful, cartoonish cover, and Robert Grossman—the iconic illustrator behind the Airplane! poster and the New Yorker's best drawings—has written a 32-page comic about Hof's life.

Packaging aside, Hof tells a heartwarming story. In between anecdotes about Ron Jeremy and a cowboy who wears panties, he and his co-writer, the ghostwriter and screenwriter Pablo Fenjves, highlight traumatic moments from Hof's life. (People with happy childhoods rarely become prostitutes or pimps.) In one of the book's saddest moments, Hof's father moves into one of his properties and then stops speaking to him. One day he received a call from a neighbor telling him the home has fallen into disrepair. Hof asks the neighbor to ask his dad to call him, and the neighbor breaks the news that his dad has been dead for a year. At another point, while discussing his need for love, Hof writes, "What's the point of getting into bed alone? What's the point of living?"

Between the book itself and Hof's plans to sell it by way of billboards and press stunts, the memoir will surely get people talking. When I read it on the subway, a couple people pointed at the cover and gasped. "It's called The Art of the Pimp," a woman whispered to the man sitting next to her. The finger-pointing was worth it: The Art of the Pimp made me laugh, cry, and squirm all at the same time.

Recently I sat down with the Hof for an hour to discuss the writing process, the differences between pimping out a book and a hooker, and why he dedicated a whole chapter to his refusal to show Ron Jeremy his dick.

VICE: Why did you decide to write your memoirs?
Dennis Hof: Judith [Regan's been] my New York wife for a long time. She's been trying to talk me into doing this book for ten years. I met her a long, long time ago. I remember I went into her office. I said to Judith, "We're going to get along real well." And she said, "Why?" I said, "Because I understand you've got the biggest dick [in publishing], and guess what: I got balls like a water buffalo." We've been friends ever since.

[body_image width='1600' height='1035' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='dennis-hoff-is-making-books-sexy-again-789-body-image-1421085976.jpg' id='17445']

Why did it take you a decade to agree to write the book?
I was kind of apprehensive, I have to say, to put myself out there, because what I've done for 22 years is built a persona. There's this persona of this champagne-drinking, cigar-smoking guy that bangs eight girls every morning before breakfast, has a little breakfast, goes to the pool, bangs another five or six in the afternoon, takes a nap, gets a massage, and hits another four in the nighttime. That's just not the reality of it all. I'm putting it out there, and Judith told me, when we finally made the deal, she said, "Listen, this can be a very heavy ride, and many people have broken down over this if you're really forthright and truthful about it." And I thought, You know what, I'm a tough guy. But there was some times it kind of got to me.

You included a psychiatrist's scathing psychological evaluation of you and your ex's essay about how much she hates you in the book. Why'd you do that?
I just put it all out there. I didn't hold anything back. People are going to be shocked. It's shocking that people like Judith, like Madam Suzette, who's worked with me for 23 years, and Heidi Fleiss, who's my dear friend [were shocked]. These are three of the smartest women on the planet, and there's things that they don't know about me, and now they know I let everybody take a shot at me. I asked people to be honest in their evaluation.

The psychiatrist that did this is a real psychiatrist. Her clients are some of the heaviest people in New York City. We had a two-hour session. There were people in there—the PAs and the assistant to the psychiatrist in there were crying—and so it was a very heavy time, but I was perfectly honest with her. I don't agree with her synopsis: My life is good. My life is what every man wishes his life was. I've got celebrity, I've got money, and I've got girls everywhere—exactly 540 of them.

Later in the book, you describe speaking at Oxford. What did you talk about there?
I fight the battle of sex trafficking. Sex trafficking is out of hand in America—out of hand. The TV show [HBO's Cathouse] has given me the opportunity to have an international audience. I'm proud that I spoke where Mother Teresa, Dalai Lama, Winston Churchill, and Albert Einstein spoke, at Oxford University. I speak on legalization of prostitution and how that's how you fight sex trafficking. You can never control the demand; guys are going to buy sex. We all want it, and guys are gonna buy it. What you can control is the supply. The supply can be controlled by legalization, because if a guy has an option, he's going to go to a legal alternative as opposed to dealing with a criminal.

What was your childhood like?
My parents had good standards. Humble, nice, hardworking people. The biggest thing that my father taught me was you make the decisions. When he got out of World War II, he was down in Phoenix, Arizona, by a hotel, had a bicycle shop and rented bicycles and little motor scooters. He saw himself developing into a motorcycle franchise and growing that way. My mother talked him into quitting all that. She reminded him that during the Depression, the only people that knew that were eating properly were civil servants.

He listened to her, [by becoming a mailman], and he just always felt like he never accomplished anything, so I wanted to be independent. I wanted to be my own man and have my own business. I wanted to roll the dice, and I wanted to either make it or break it. I started off with gas stations. I think that's probably a lot of my childhood; I'm a gentleman. I'm the guy that's going to pull the chair out for a girl. It's like what I tell the girls: I open the car doors, I pay the bills, you come first, and we're all gonna get along real well.

At the same time, the book discusses your heartache of going through a lot of partners. Are you still searching for true love?
I think we all are. Krissy is here living with me now, and we're actually moving into my real home. She's 16 months from getting her doctorate, and she's going to work in the business as she's getting her doctorate and work in the legislature as a lobbyist for me. I now own over 40 percent of all the [legal] brothels in North America. She's smart, she's worked in the business a little bit, she's beautiful. If you go to KrissySummers.com, you can check her out.

"If I'm not having sex, if I'm not ejaculating, I want to be laughing."

Your love life, your friendships—everything is connected to business. Are you treating the book like a business? I heard rumors you were taking out billboards.
I'm going to be a relentless marketer—we're already on it. I have a website, BunnyRanch.com, that gets 125 million to 200 million hits a month, depending on what media I'm doing. I've got banners on that. The girls are all working; I've got an army of girls working social media, and retweeting, and everything. I'm going to reach out to the 200 radio stations that I have had relationships with forever. I do about 100 interviews a month on radio, and I get up five days a week, and I'm up and starting on the east coast at 4:30 in the morning working my way across the country. I'm working on a big rock star bus right now—a pink bus—to travel around the country in, hit every little city. I'm gonna pimp it, and that's what I do.

Along with your business and Krissy, I know Ron Jeremy is one of the most important parts of your life. I know Judith is your "New York wife" and Madame Suzette is your "office wife," but is Ron Jeremy your real wife?
Ron's my bitch. I haven't called Ron in the male context in 12 or 15 years—it's her. I feed her, I gave her that big belly, and I'm probably responsible for that heart attack. I buy her clothes. What's she wearing today? She's wearing a BunnyRanch T-shirt, she's wearing some Crocs that I bought her, because every year for her birthday, I buy her three pair of Crocs: one formal pair, black, and then I buy two of the craziest colors. This year I got pink and I got orange.

Ron's my best buddy. Every time we're together, we never get enough. There's always something crazy going on; Ron's always sleeping someplace. We'll be at the Emmys or the Grammys or something, and he'll be sleeping. Ron went to sleep at Jerry Buss's funeral and we're in the section with the family, and I'm waking her up. I was like, "Butthead, wake the fuck up. They think it's a double funeral. They think you died too." I've got a website, SleepingWithRonJeremy.com; it's just pictures of Ron sleeping everywhere. We laugh, we giggle, we have a great time. I love to have fun. If I'm not having sex, if I'm not ejaculating, I want to be laughing—and I can laugh a lot more than I can ejaculate.

If you love Ron so much, why didn't you want him to see your dick? There's a whole chapter about that.
First of all, I'm a good size, but Ron is the king. I've never been into group sex with another guy. I've got this philosophy that I need to be the only penis in the room. And I can be naked with a bunch of girls at a party and have the time of my life. I just don't want to see a guy's dick and I don't really want him seeing mine.

You've got the girlfriend, you've got Ron, you've got the Ranch, and now you've got a memoir. What else do you want in life?
One, I want health. It's the old saying, "If I'd have known life was going to be so good, I would've taken better care of myself." And then I want to fight sex trafficking. I think that's my way of giving back to the world in a big way, and I'm real good at it. If my tombstone says, '"best friend, greatest salesman, and fought sex trafficking," I'm good with that.

Want more Hof? Visit Regan Art's website and pre-order The Art of the Pimp on Amazon.

Follow Mitchell Sunderland on Twitter.

A lot of people have gotten tired of music that sounds like it was made by an army of tearful clones designed and dispatched by the Kinsella brothers, but I still have a soft spot for 2015 bands that confidently crib from American Football. You Blew It! has been on the short list of bands mentioned in every "emo revival" article for the past year, and they deserve all the press they're getting, as stupid as that phrase may be.

This song, "Bedside Manor," harkens back to a time when emo was less about eyeliner and more about large-hearted Midwestern boys wearing plaid and carrying their keys on carabiners. You should be listening to it already.

[body_image width='450' height='640' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='shut-up-about-a-ukip-of-the-left-883-body-image-1421021003.jpg' id='17265']

This article originally appeared on VICE UK.

At the outset of 2015, a glance across Europe shows that left-wing parties are likely to gain significant ground in this year's elections. Yet despite five years of austerity here, things aren't as sunny for the left in Britain as they are in Greece or Spain. Labor chase Tory votes, committing to cut after cut. The Greens, fresh from attacking the wages of garbage workers in Brighton, aim to profit from a "green surge" by maybe winning a seat in Norwich—which would bring their grand total up to two. Meanwhile, UKIP seem likely not only to slither up the polls but to drag every political debate further to the right.

UKIP remain something of a mystery to the left—most explanations for their success are awkward adaptations of historic theories about how racist parties gain power, for instance, that they exploit economic crisis by finding a scapegoat, or that with the help of a craven media they make previously taboo ideas respectable. But UKIP is also an object of envy. That's why terrified policy wonks in Labor back rooms try to compete with them by getting a touch more racist on immigration, or a bit more hateful toward those who claim benefits.

It's also why political hacks write articles on the need for a "UKIP of the left." The idea has reared its head on numerous occasions over the last few years of austerity gloom and is sure to do so again as the election nears. But I'm already tired of the idea. The left wishes it could be more like the right? When you put it like that you can see how counter-intuitive it is. Wanting a UKIP of the left is like wanting a cancer that makes you healthier—it just doesn't work like that.

What people mean when they say they want a UKIP of the left is that they'd like to see a bit more pandering to racism under the guise of "realism." That or perhaps a more charismatic leader, someone with the ability to burn Nigel Farage with a couple of righteous zingers on Have I Got News for You.

One of the closest historical analogues to Nigel Farage is Pierre Poujade, the leader of a mid-20th century populist movement in France. Given the ego-stroking name "Poujadism," in the same way some refer to "Faragism," Poujade's movement distrusted "elites," loathed taxation, and whipped up racism and xenophobia among their constituency. Like Farage, Poujade gave voice to popular contempt for a political system that seemed remote. He did it by decrying the loss of empire, bemoaning decadent intellectuals, and branding members of the chamber of deputies pederasts—Farage hasn't called an MP a pedo yet but you can see the similarities.

But there are differences as well: whereas Poujade was genuinely an outsider to the political system, Farage is a product of the same elites he makes capital attacking. UKIP themselves are a very uneasy alliance of oddball, zero-tax, urban "libertarians," fringe shire racists, and a sizeable portion of an alienated working class outside of the major cities. One thing both UKIP and the Poujadists have in common is their relation to organized fascists; though the party continues to pay lip-service to their distance from out-and-out fascists, a number of former National Front and BNP organizers have swollen their ranks. They also have to keep on turfing out members for making racist remarks—such as the councilor who said she had a "problem" with "negroes" because there was "something about their faces"—without acknowledging why such people might be attracted to the party in the first place.

In 1956, Poujade's party took 12 percent of the popular vote at the general election—around the same number UKIP is polling today. This result has occasionally confused political scientists, who generally expect far-right victories in times of economic crisis, rather than the years of growth that preceded 1956. But that growth was misleading, and a bad way to measure the major economic shifts that were happening in France and the rest of Europe at the time: major urbanization and the emergence of large supermarkets threatened the small-time shopkeepers and farmers who made up Poujade's base.

This might suggest that it's not quite right to look at the 2008 financial crisis and its ongoing aftermath as the reason for UKIP's success. Much of UKIP's key voter base has felt abandoned by government for far longer than five years; though they are different than Poujade's shopkeeper, many have seen employment gradually drain out of their communities, their wages stagnate, and their infrastructure crumble. The easy credit, cheap goods, and central government bungs that covered significant shifts in labor patterns over the last two decades have now largely disappeared, and the discontent they kept simmering now risks bursting into full-blown social reaction.

It's idiotic to think that UKIP's success is just because their leader is on TV a lot, says things racists like and has something resembling a personality. Sure, a servile media and a horde of indistinguishable party automatons manning the green benches help Farage to portray himself as a political insurgent, but that's not the whole story. What unites the journalists and party-wonks calling for a UKIP of the left is a suspicion that people outside the political class are too stupid to know what's good for them. Treating UKIP voters simply as idiots incapable of telling truth from reality is to mimic the derision and abandonment they feel coming from just about every part of government and the press. To think that all they need is a better lie—socialist bullshit rather than reactionary conservative bullshit—so they line up behind your party instead of UKIP is purely cynical.

Some of the problem here is in the way most political journalists—and certainly most politicians—think about politics. They treat politics almost as if it were a board game, where it's natural that all participants adopt positions out of electoral expediency and in which left and right are distinguishable only by their leaders, who largely agree on how to "do" politics. To them, people outside of politics exist only as points to be lined up behind political "professionals," who throw a cut to a welfare program here or an expensive new infrastructure project there —this bread or that circus—to keep their base happy.

It's only in this model of politics that you can look at what UKIP does and say, "We want to do that, but on the left. The format will be the same, but with nationalization not nationalism, and hating on bankers, not on immigrants." It is a politics that treats the public as either idiots too stupid to be led by anything but a "noble lie," or, if they will not buy the lie, just a problem to be managed.

Veterans of the left look to the crumbling of the labor movement to explain falling working-class opposition to UKIP-like ideas in everyday life. They hark back to a time when the unemployed British worker believed himself to have more in common with a migrant worker than with a privately educated stockbroker who is also British.

Nostalgic left movements—like Left Unity, based on Ken Loach's film the Spirit of 45, or the People's Assembly, which has similar ideas—try to compete with UKIP over visions of a lost past. UKIP wants to take us back to a Britain just after the Second World War because there were fewer immigrants and women in jobs, whereas the nostalgic left wants to take us back to the same time because we built the NHS and some working-class people were somewhat better off. It's too easy to mythologize this period, to forget that just days into their term a Labor government sent troops in to deal with striking dockers, or that they collaborated with the TUC to repress wages, or that during the second half of their term Labor signed off a huge increase in military spending and had a key role in developing NATO.

But nostalgia is natural terrain for the right, for whom the world is ever decaying from its former glory. The left is strongest when it stakes a claim to the future. The right would not be able to compete if the left were to shift the conversation on to, say, imagining a world where unnecessary work is eliminated, much of what remains is automated, and we're left to sit around sharing newly discovered cheese varieties, creating ever more niche club nights, and exploring the oceans—or whatever makes for a happy, fulfilled humanity.

This is arguably a more attractive vision than that of the nostalgic-left reverting to everybody being guaranteed a stultifying nine-to-five job in a factory and the comforting blanket of social democracy—social democracy that flourished, at least in part, on the back of cheap labor flowing in to Britain from its former colonies. It's more realistic, too; whereas European social democracy requires an "outside" of cheap labor which is rapidly disappearing, the technology to begin a transition out of scarcity already exists—it's just a matter of who gets to control its development.

Perhaps well-intentioned nostalgia is exactly what attracts the fossils and bureaucrats of the trade union movement to groups like Left Unity and the People's Assembly. They're the perfect venue for audience-pleasing sabre-rattlers who have for five years promised "mass civil disobedience" and failed time and again to deliver.

Challenging UKIP, rather than trying to ape them, means facing reality with more sobriety than any political partly currently can. That doesn't mean talking about immigration in as racist a way as possible. It means facing the reality of decades of disinvestment in a number of English towns outside of the major cities. It means figuring out how to deal with a coming parliament that is already locked in to further major cuts to services. It means working out what to do when automation takes all our jobs.

Britain can deal with all these things, to some extent. It can expand workfare programs, stagger through and defer financial crises yet again, but only on the promise of greater misery for the many. As one of the 20th century's clearest analysts of social crisis, Walter Benjamin, once put it: the catastrophe is that it just goes on like this.

If there is something to be said for fantasies of a "UKIP of the left," it's that they rest on a recognition that ideas far to the left of mainstream politics enjoy enormous popular support. (For instance, the idea of a housing rent-cap as a first step to decommodifying housing entirely.) But what the fantasies don't tackle is a deep and well-founded skepticism toward politics and politicians, and a public that believes that political promises are made only to be broken. For these ideas to have force, they require a new way of doing politics. The job requires the left to be everything that UKIP is not. It doesn't require the left to trade on false hope rather than fear, but to build from the ground up a movement no longer reliant upon politicians' promises but capable of grasping the future for itself.

Follow James Butler on Twitter.

More UK politics:

How Britain Dealt with Shit Hitting the Fan in 2014

How Nigel Farage and Russell Brand Became Bigger than British Politics

I Took a Very Thorough Look Through British MP's Twitter Favourites

[body_image width='1200' height='888' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='we-went-to-bill-cosbys-show-in-hamilton-283-body-image-1421086869.jpg' id='17447']Protesters outside Bill Cosby's Friday performance in Hamilton. All photos via Adam Jackson

Call it classic Canadian politeness or just good, old-fashioned capitalism, but despite having his Netflix special, his upcoming NBC sitcom, and almost all of his American tour dates cancelled, Bill Cosby's three Canadian tour dates still went through. Even though the once-celebrated comedian is facing allegations of drugging and rape by no fewer than 30 women, he's already received a standing ovation in Kitchener, made an awful, disgusting joke about the allegations against him in London, Ontario (reportedly to wild applause), and on Friday ended his mini-tour in Hamilton. All this despite strong showings of support for his victims outside his shows.

I still remember my first Bill Cosby tape—Himself, recorded in 1982 at Hamilton Place Theater. I was in fifth grade and listened to it incessantly on my Walkman, loving every moment. As a one-time Cosby fan, but also someone who doesn't like rapists, it made me wonder—could a person appreciate Bill Cosby: standup comedian while chastising Bill Cosby: alleged rapist? In other words, can you separate a person from their art? Chris Brown is by all accounts reprehensible, but he put out one of the best pop albums of last year. Woody Allen is by some accounts a scumbag, but his recent releases are some of the best movies of his career. Hell, even the guy Mark Wahlberg assaulted has his back.

But with music and movies there's a dividing line. One can squint and say, "This isn't about that." But stand-up comedy, even at its most surreal, is still a person speaking directly to you. As someone who dabbles in comedy and has always been deeply interested in seeing Cosby's renowned technical comedy skills, I decided to go to Hamilton to see if it was possible to make that distinction.

[body_image width='1200' height='888' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='we-went-to-bill-cosbys-show-in-hamilton-283-body-image-1421087452.jpg' id='17448']

The show, predictably, was not sold out. I was able to walk into the box office three hours before showtime and get a cheap ticket. That didn't bode well for appreciating this strictly as a comedy show. Hamilton Place Theater holds roughly 2,200 people and shows this size this need big, loud crowds to work.

Speaking of big, loud crowds, when I arrived there was already a strong protest presence. At 7 PM, an hour before showtime, Anne Bokma had organized a demonstration outside the venue. Despite the bitter, unrelenting cold there were roughly 30-40 people, mostly women, outside of the show. Their message was simple – Bill Cosby is a rapist and should not be celebrated. Police were present, but they were mostly ornamental. Everyone was open to talking and the vibe wasn't melancholy, just serious. These people were here for a cause. Two women I was talking to, Audrey and Jennifer, also remarked, "Y'know, there are also a lot of crazy men here."

As if on cue I ran into men's rights group A Voice For Men, who were protesting the protest with delightful chants like "Racism plus sexism equals feminism." VICE has covered this particular group before. They assured me that their cause was simply promoting a fair trial and standing up for the judicial system. I tried to take a photo of them, but both of my hands were uncontrollably squeezed into fists during our encounter. Weird, huh?

[body_image width='1200' height='888' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='we-went-to-bill-cosbys-show-in-hamilton-283-body-image-1421089055.jpg' id='17451']

The crowd inside was naturally much, much different—mostly elderly, mostly white, and, according to the people I met, mostly apologetic for even being there. One couple I spoke with had been there for the original Himself recording in 1982, and said they'd been fans of Cosby since he was "the first negro on television," a problematic claim for a number of reasons. Even so, the crowd was not standing firm or trying to fight fire with fire. They seemed embarrassed to be associated with the event. "My daughter got the tickets for us for Christmas, but she said if we didn't want to go it was okay," was the defining quote of the evening.

At 8:02 Cosby walked on stage wearing a grey hoody with "Hello Friend" on it to as much applause as the sparse crowd could muster. At 77 years old, Cosby is still remarkably vibrant on-stage and can control a crowd, but as someone who's seen enough brilliant people perform to empty rooms, I could see in his eyes he wasn't happy. His vibe was more "old Wal-Mart greeter going through the motions" than "comedy legend in his element." His very performance was an act of defiance against a society that is condemning him, and here was society essentially saying "meh" back.

He began, unpredictably, by directly referencing the protest outside. He called the protesters brave for handling the cold and said that, while there might be interruptions tonight we in the audience should remain calm, let it pass, and allow the show to go on.

[youtube src='//www.youtube.com/embed/E640mvQNS6E' width='500' height='281']

About 15 minutes into a bit about how weird being a kid was, 30 women stood up, each one representing a woman who has come forward so far, and began chanting "We believe the women" while blowing rape whistles. Cosby leapt to his feet and pleaded with the crowd to stay quiet and calm, but it was no use. The protest continued until security escorted them out, while crowd members yelled things like, "Go believe outside!" to applause. The show was successfully disrupted and it made viewing this as a normal comedy show impossible, as I sort of always knew it would be.

"Arrogant piece of shit!" was yelled twice.

"Please don't. Stop. Calm," Cosby retorted. "It will calm."

The next outburst was an unfortunate, "Our product is steel, our strength is people!" While great in spirit, that could have probably used some workshopping.

"If security will... and we will calmly... let them out," Cosby said as the last of the insurgents were led out. And with a calm, cool, "Now, if I may," Cosby returned seamlessly to his act.

The show continued and, frankly, bored me to tears. I have a difficult time relating to the childhood of a 77-year-old man and I have a difficult time relating to the realities of someone with $400 million. During one anecdote he went out of his way to mention that he flew first class.

One unique part of the show was something I've dubbed 'positive heckling', which is somehow worse than regular heckling. Apropos of nothing a woman belted out, "We love you, Crosby," to which Bill said nothing. She continued, "We fucking love you," over and over until he had to respond. Usually this sort of person would be drowned out by a full house, but with this few people there was no choice. "I know, I know, but you said Crosby," was the best crowd work this veteran could muster.

The show continued with the force of a runaway chipmunk. There were chuckles here and there, but I was seeing just a man at work, not an artist performing a craft. I can't even fathom the last time Bill Cosby has been forced to perform in front of an empty room, but it had clearly messed with his head. There were empty seats in the front row. He fumbled lines, forgot segues, and generally looked like he was counting the seconds until his time onstage was over.

[body_image width='1200' height='888' path='images/content-images/2015/01/12/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/12/' filename='we-went-to-bill-cosbys-show-in-hamilton-283-body-image-1421088064.jpg' id='17450']

I walked out during a bit about women drivers because I'm not a caveman and I had better things to do with my life than fall asleep in a balcony listening to an accused rapist tell terrible jokes. The protest portion was over and, really, they won. The show went on, but the abysmal attendance caused more damage to Cosby's ego than simply not performing would have. The man is a pro. That's undeniable. You can't operate on a level that high for that many years without being great at your job, but without the fuel of a full house it didn't feel like anything. Just a sad old man clinging to something that's now gone.

As I walked back to the bus station I thought about what I'd just seen. The protest was over and the streets were empty. When I got to the station and was waiting for my bus I saw two ornery white teenagers preparing for fisticuffs. "Why don't you go suck your mother?" one taunted the other, and I laughed harder than I had at anything all night. That's the nature of comedy—something absurd happening at an unexpected moment and throwing you off your axis.

For me, Cosby's legacy is ruined forever. It will be impossible to watch a Cosby Show rerun, listen to an old album, or even eat a pudding pop without thinking about the (so far) 30 women who have come forward. Nothing can take away what he's accomplished, from being the first African-American lead actor on TV to an unprecedented run on television, but he's also accused of accomplishing many heinous things and we can't take that away from him, either.

Also, his show was super fucking boring.

Follow Adam on Twitter.

[body_image width='640' height='427' path='images/content-images/2015/01/09/' crop='images/content-images-crops/2015/01/09/' filename='irish-censorship-charlie-hebdo-norma-costello-029-body-image-1420828648.jpg' id='17061']

Photo by Chris Bethel

This article originally appeared on VICE UK

This week, as the European press printed defiant front pages and re-published iconic Charlie Hebdo cartoons, the Irish media mostly settled for tame pictures of their staff holding signs of support and a vigil in Dublin. For all the talk of the importance of free speech going round, the fact is that thanks to arcane blasphemy laws, were Charlie Hebdo to have been an Irish publication it may have found itself in a tricky legal situation.

A Muslim scholar, Dr. Ali Selim, is threatening to use these laws if the Irish media prints cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad—in Ireland, blasphemy is technically illegal under the Constitution, although it is difficult to prosecute.

You might expect this kind of law to be a hangover from a more conservative time. But "publication or utterance of blasphemous matter" was only made an offense in 2009, much to the dismay of Ireland's atheists.

Dr. Eoin Daly, a law lecturer from National University of Ireland, Galway, says that if Selim sues, it would be a first time a case would be tried under Ireland's new blasphemy law.

"When it comes to reprinting Charlie Hebdo material here, it's difficult to say definitively [whether it would fall afoul of the law], as there have been no cases brought under the new blasphemy law," he said. "The uncertainty it generates is enough to cause a chilling effect in relation to creative and provocative forms of speech, and that in itself is reason enough to repeal the law."

Many in Ireland agree and feel the law is out of step with contemporary Irish society. This has prompted the government to push for a referendum in 2015, asking Irish citizens whether they think the crime of blasphemy should be removed from the constitution.

But yesterday, as Irish journalists stood in solidarity with the " Je Suis Charlie" campaign, had they published similar material in Ireland they could have ended up with a €25,000 ($29,600) fine.

In 1926, four years after independence from Britain, the Committee for Evil Literature was established in Dublin. The committee—headed up by a Catholic priest and a Church of Ireland reverend—published a report banning "immoral" publications like Woman's Weekly, Vogue, and News of the World. Information on contraception and a random list of American detective novels were also banned.

Fast-forward almost 90 years to present day and you have an ailing quango born from that report: the Censorship of Publications Board. Like Ireland's 2009 updated blasphemy laws, the country's censorship board seem completely out of touch with reality.

The quango, which meets in private, was supposed to disband but has to remain in place until it has finished "investigating" former Justice Minister Alan Shatter's novel Laura. The book centers around a pro-life politician who tries to force his assistant to have an abortion after they have an affair.

It features this sex scene:

Her inexperienced hands touched him so tentatively that every muscle in his body ached for fulfilment. When he entered her, he knew it was her first time. He moved slowly and she dug her fingers into his back, moaning and gasping for breath. When she loosened her grip and her body relaxed, he knew he was going to erupt. She gasped again as he pulled himself free of her and overflowed on her slender body. They were lying on the carpeted floor of his office... It was almost midnight and, except for the Gardaí at the entrance gates, Leinster House was deserted.

It also mentions abortion, which is illegal in Ireland under the Eighth Amendment.

Former Communications Minister Pat Rabbitte stalled the much-needed disbanding of the quango until the complaint against the politician's book was "dealt with."

His political point scoring means Ireland still has a fully functioning censorship board, free to investigate and pass judgement on matters of "public morality," such as in 2003, when porno magazine Fox was banned from Irish shelves.

The scary thing about Ireland's censorship laws is, like the 2009 blasphemy law, they are deemed so devoid of social relevance that no one cares about them.

It takes a tragedy like the Charlie Hebdo massacre for people to pay attention and for governments to start reflecting on the contemporary values of a society that has changed so dramatically in mere decades but where "blasphemy" is still something we apparently have to worry about.

Follow Norma Costello on Twitter.

For ex-congressman and GOP strategist Vin Weber, Christmas came a few days early and from an unlikely source: the Qatari government. In December, three days before the holiday, the former Minnesota lawmaker and his lobbying firm, Mercury LLC, signed a lucrative lobbying contract with theGulf State,receiving a $465,000 advance for the first few months of work.

Weber isn't alone. Over the past year and a half, regimes throughout the Middle East, from Turkey to the United Arab Emirates, have gone on what appears to be a shopping spree for former members of Congress. Compared to the rest of the world, Middle East governments have accounted for more than fifty percent of the latest revolving door hires for former lawmakers during this time period, according to a review of disclosures by VICE.

It's not out of the ordinary for special interest groups to enlist retired lawmakers-turned-lobbyists to peddle influence in the U.S. Capitol. What's unique here is that most special interests aren't countries home to investors accused of providing support to anti-American militants in Syria or engaged in multi-billion dollar arms deals that require American military approval, as is the case with Qatar and some of its regional neighbors.

What's also striking about the latest surge in foreign lobbying is that many of these former lawmakers maintain influence that extends well beyond the halls of Congress. Former Michigan Representative Pete Hoekstra, who used to chair the House Intelligence Committee, appears regularly in the media to demand that the US increase its arms assistance to the Kurds in northern Iraq. Writing for the conservative news outlet National Review, Hoekstra argued that, "the United States needs to immediately provide [the Peshmerga] with more than light arms and artillery to tip the scales in their favor and overcome the firepower of the Islamists." In that instance and in others, Hoekstra has often not disclosed that since August 12th, he has worked as a paid representative of the Kurdistan Regional Government, which relies on the beleaguered Peshmerga militia for safety against ISIS.

The same goes for former US Senator Norm Coleman, a lobbyist who serves on the board of the influential Republican Jewish Coalition, and whose Super PAC, American Action Network, spent over $12.3 million to help elect Republicans last year. Since July, Coleman has been a registered lobbyist for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, hired in part to work on sanctions against Iran, a key priority of Saudi Arabia's ruling family. Shortly after signing up as a lobbyist for the Saudis, Coleman, introduced only as a former Senator, gave a speech on Capitol Hill imploring his congressional allies to realize that Israel and Saudi Arabia have many shared policy priorities, and that the United States "should be hand in glove with our allies in the region." And in a Twitter message greeting the new Congress last week, Coleman wrote that a "nuclear Iran" is the biggest threat and linked to an article calling for Congress to prioritize a new round of Iran sanctions.

Other lawmakers to join the gravy train of new Middle East lobbying business include former Congressman Mike Castle, a Delaware Republican who now represents the United Arab Emirates; the bipartisan duo of former Senators John Breaux (D-Louisiana) and Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) who now also work for the Kurdish government; and former Congressman Bill Delahunt, a Democrat from Massachusetts who is now on the payroll of Azerbaijan.

The Republic of Turkey—one of the most prolific sources for foreign lobbying contracts and the third largest sponsor of congressional vacation junkets—also renewed its longstanding business with its team of lawmaker-lobbyists, including former Senator Tim Hutchinson, former Democratic House leader Dick Gephardt, former Republican Speaker of the House Denny Hastert, and ex-congressman Al Wynn.

Like many of Middle East governments, Turkey is heavily concerned with the rising instability in the region, and has faced increasing criticism for failing to intervene against the Islamic State in Syria. For Gephardt, whose contract is worth $1.4 million per year,that meant multiple contacts to House and Senate members on supporting rebel groups and foreign aid in Syria last year. He also distributed a pamphlet, according to disclosures, titled " Stop the Turkey Bashing."

It's not always clear what these lawmaker-lobbyists say or do on behalf of their foreign supervisors, but what is clear is that many of these politicians are willing to renege on their past commitments to human rights. Delahunt, for example, led inquiries in Congress to cast a light into the brutal abuses of Azerbaijan. If anything, Azerbaijan has gotten worse, according to international observers, who note that since last year, the country has gone on an unprecedented crackdown of activists, journalists, and other perceived opponents of the regime. But instead of pushing back against such crimes, Delahunt now works to put a positive spin on the developments.

Similarly, Coleman, when he was still a Senator from Minnesota, signed off on letters chastising the Saudi government for financing anti-Semitic propaganda throughout the world. Though Saudi Arabia has stepped up its support for extremists, as well as campaigns against dissent—executing petty criminals, drug dealers, and even those accused of "sorcery" with gruesome beheadings last year—with $60,000 per month now billed to the Saudi government by his law firm, Coleman is no longer a critic.

The influx of foreign influence into Washington is a growing phenomenon. As the New York Times reported late last year, major think tanks, including the Brookings Institute and the Atlantic Council, have allowed foreign donors to call the shots on their policy prescriptions. Major trade groups that can now play an unlimited role in influencing elections, thanks to the Citizens United ruling, receive direct funds from corporations headquartered in foreign lands. The American Petroleum Institute, for instance, is run by a board of directors that includes an executive from ARAMCO, the Saudi state-owned oil company that takes its orders from the Saudi ruling family.

Lobbying these days is so much more than simply pigeonholing lawmakers as they leave the committee room. Indeed, the deal between Vin Weber and Qatar stipulates that Weber's firm, a team that includes the former US Ambassador to Qatar, will attempt to influence American foreign policy through outreach to non-government groups "such as think tanks and businesses." Weber himself is a close advisor to many GOP leaders, including former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, and helped lead a campaign group that spent over $8 million on the elections last year. With that much influence, he's probably worth every penny to the ruling Al Thani family.

So it should be of little surprise that firms seeking to control the direction of U.S. foreign policy are now on a hiring spree of lawmakers. In an era of big money politics, in which those with deep pockets have the most access and influence over government, it's only natural that lawmakers are gravitating to the next payday. Why only work for J.P. Morgan or Koch Industries when there are eager clients in Abu Dhabi and Doha?

Follow Lee Fang on Twitter.

The FBI claims that it doesn't need a warrant to use so-called Stingray cell-phone tracking technology in public spaces, according to two US Senators raising privacy concerns over use of the devices.

Stingrays and similar devices intercept data by emulating a cell phone tower, say privacy groups. With the briefcase-size technology, police can identify and locate cell phone users in a general area or search for a specific person while also vacuuming up metadata from phones.

The FBI recently settled on a new policy surrounding the use of Stingrays and similar technology that requires agents to obtain a warrant before using the technology in a criminal investigation. However, the policy includes such broad exceptions that privacy advocates worry they do practically nothing to protect citizens' Fourth Amendment rights.

The new policy was first revealed by former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and the then ranking Republican on the committee, Chuck Grassley—who has since become chairman—in a letter to the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security released at the end of December.

In the letter, Leahy and Grassley question whether law enforcement agencies using cell-phone-tracking technology "have adequately considered the privacy interests of other individuals who are not targets of the inception, but whose
information is nevertheless being collected when these devices are used."

The Wall Street Journal reported in November that the US Marshals Service was using cell-phone-tracking technology in small aircraft to search for criminal suspects, sweeping up thousands of other cell phone signals in the process.

Law enforcement agencies purchase Stingrays and similar devices—technically called International Mobile Subscriber Identity catchers—through federal grants under the auspices of anti-terrorism operations. Police say the technology can also be used for search-and-rescue operations, in kidnapping situations, and disaster response.

According to Leahy and Grassley, the FBI's new policy contains an exception for "cases that pose an imminent danger to public safety, cases that involve a fugitive, or cases in which the technology is used in public places or other locations at which the FBI deems there is no reasonable expectation of privacy."

Hanni Fakhoury, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said in a statement to VICE that it "seems that a carve out to allow the FBI to use an IMSI catcher in public without a warrant is an exception that swallows the rule."

Fakhoury said the FBI's new policy is "a good first step towards transparency, but there need to be a lot more information made public about how these devices are used.

"First, what was happening before the change in policy?" Fakhoury continued. "If the new policy requires the FBI to get a warrant to use the device but has an exception for when the device is in public use, does that mean the feds were using IMSI catchers to capture signals emanating from the home, a place clearly protected by the Fourth Amendment? Second, what is the requirement for FBI's use of these devices in public places, which is presumably where the bulk of these devices are used?"

Leahy and Grassley are pressing the Justice Department for more details on the privacy implications of the technology.

"The Judiciary Committee needs a broader understanding of the full range of law enforcement agencies that use this technology, the policies in place to protect the privacy interests of those whose information might be collected using these devices, and the legal process that DOJ and DHS entities seek prior to using them," Leahy and Grassley wrote in their letter to Attorney General Eric Holder and DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson.

Reports of police departments using Stingrays first surfaced in December 2013, when USA Today reported that cell phone surveillance technology originally designed for the US military was finding its way into state and local police departments across the country.

Since that report, the ACLU has unearthed public records showing police departments and federal law enforcement in 19 states and the District of Columbia are using IMSI catchers.

Transparency groups and news organizations trying to dig up more information on Stingrays have been stymied by an aggressive effort from federal agents, local police departments, and the company that manufactures the devices.

Earlier this year in Sarasota, Florida, the US Marshals Service confiscated records on Stingray surveillance from a courthouse just hours before the records were due to be handed over to the ACLU.

In September, a public records request revealed state and local police must sign a non-disclosure agreement with the FBI, keeping details of the devices secret.

Prosecutors in Baltimore went so far as to toss key evidence in a case rather than reveal details of how police used a Stingray to track the defendant.

The FBI and DHS did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a statement to VICE, the Justice Department said only that it is reviewing Leahy and Grassley's letter, which calls for a response to their concerns by the end of the month.

Follow CJ Ciaramella on Twitter.