Monday, 16 November 2015

Are we all Parisians today? [updated]

Embedded image permalink

“Je suis Charlie Hebdo,” everyone said ten months ago when their offices were shot up by savages. We all spoke up for their free speech – yet Charlie’s cartoons were reprinted hardly at all, and the news now is replete with reports of politicians wanting non-warmists arrested and university campuses demanding that free speech be shut down.

“We are all Londoners today,” we all said ten years ago when London was bombed by savages. Hell, I said it myself---hoping that’s where the barbarians would be sent. Yet the savages are still bombing – and now, ten years later, there is still no sign of a decent, methodical, coordinated, fully-focussed western response to the barbarism. (And hardly a word of what I wrote then needs to change part from the Proper Nouns.)

So are we all Parisians today? If we are—and sympathy and French flags are everywhere, and Facebook is full of French avatars–it's starting to look less like a brave show of solidarity in ending this never-ending threat, and more like embracing a future of never-ending victimhood.

Do we really wish to hunt down and kill all those who just carried out these mass-murders—and to hunt down and kill those who trained them, financed them, coordinated them and supplied them (without whom the barbarians could only sing like impotent castrati)?

No, you don’t want to do that?

You don’t want that done in your name?

Then just add yourself to that list of people impotently wringing their hands while waving a banner declaring their identity to be “victim.”

"Please don’t say things like, “I stand with France,” or “Those poor French people, victims of that attack!” unless you’re prepared to say and do the following things:
    "Stop saying “Islam” is about peace and love. It’s not. It’s about submission; the people who really get this are the ones who launch these attacks in the name of their religion.
    "Stop supporting politicians like Obama, who insist that Islamic nations like Iran have our same fundamental values and can be trusted with billions of dollars in unfrozen assets (Obama’s treaty), and who don’t mean what they say when they want to wipe Israel off the map.
    "Stop saying we don’t really need a strong military and we cannot, under any circumstances, use the full might of our military arsenal to do things to stop militant Islam in its tracks, to quite literally scare the Allah out of these people.
    "Unless or until you start to rethink your stance, you have no business expressing compassion towards the victims of people in attacks whose perpetrators – knowingly or not – you aid and support via your positions.
    "The president of France calls the attacks in Paris by militant ISIS supporters an “act of war.” Excuse me? Haven’t we been at war since at least 9/11? Even going back as far as 1979, when the first openly organised Islamic government, Iran, took Americans hostage and brutalized them for a year before setting them free?
    "We’re not supposed to admit we’re at war with Islam. But Islam has been at war with everyone else for decades now. And it’s not going to stop."

It’s not going to stop by itself.

It must be stopped.

Contemplate that. Because waving flags of solidarity isn’t enough on its own.



  • “"Thoughts and prayers won’t stop the next attack. This war against civilisation must be fought or lost." ~ Garry Kasparov
    How To Prevent The Next Paris Tragedy – Jaana Woiceshyn, CAPITALISM MAGAZINE
  • “It is no coincidence that Paris is the center of Islamic attacks in recent years. The murderous Mohammedans know the value of symbolism. They know what they can win by destroying not only our existential values (World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and Paris -- the Aquinian home of reason), but the philosophical and psychological root of those values -- reason itself.
    ”The choice of Paris as a continual target is no accident. The Islamic leaders know its significance and what they are doing. Do you?”
    The Consequences of The Fundamental Sin: Passivity In Thought and Action. And Why Paris Is The Target – Andy Clarkson, FACEBOOK GROUP
  • “Immediately the French security services will have been confident of two things: Islamic State was likely to have been behind the attacks, and the security services had dropped the ball.”
    A discarded parking ticket in a car near the Bataclan leads detectives to Brussels – GUARDIAN
  • “Indeed, many of the attacks in the West over the past 15 years have been carried out by people either born in or educated in the West. But even if the attackers have foreign passports and got into Europe via the recent influx from Syria — as one of the Paris suicide bombers allegedly did — it’s not their foreignness that is important so much as the unholy marriage that now exists between the nihilistic youths drawn to anti-modern, anti-Western death cults like ISIS and the anti-modern, anti-Western death wish of the West itself. Terrifyingly, horrifically, they are complimentary.”
    After Paris: That’s enough cultural appeasement; let’s fight for the Enlightenment. – Brendan O’Neill, SPIKED
  • “Save this to your hard drive. Pull it out whenever you find yourself thinking that ISIS is merely a reaction to the West's military activities in Iraq, or that it's ‘all about oil’ etc.” ~ Paul McKeever
    What ISIS Really Wants – Graeme Wood, THE ATLANTIC
  • “The world would be an infinitely safer place if the historical Mohammed had behaved more like Buddha or Jesus. But he did not and an increasing number of people — Muslim and non-Muslim — have been able to learn this for themselves in recent years."
    Will politicians finally admit that the Paris attacks had something to do with Islam? - Douglas Murray, SPECTATOR
  • “The … massacre once again has politicians and the media dancing around the question of whether there might be something a little bit special about this one particular religion, Islam, that causes its adherents to go around killing people. It is not considered acceptable in polite company to entertain this possibility.”
    Why Islam Is More Violent Than Christianity: An Atheist’s Guide – Robert Tracinski, THE FEDERALIST
  • “Why do so many people pretend not to know what they know about Islam and its unique role in the world today? Why do so many smear those who speak the truth about this horrendous religion and its devout followers? Why do so many ignore the fact that although other religions involve barbaric commandments, none motivates large numbers of its followers to commit atrocities the way Islam does today? ..
    “Whatever people’s motives, these facts remain: (1) To pretend not to know what one knows is to be dishonest…
    The Evil of Whitewashing Islam – Craig Biddle, OBJECTIVE STANDARD


  1. Thanks PC. I entered the fray over the weekend , while the appeasers and the milk sops were already talking about "education, social cohesion, and tolerance " Sweet JHC.
    My research [ Bangkok ] shows that the Visa to New Zealand is processed by the Country of origin . There is no interview or proper face to face assessment. It is all paper work . It is ticked off by the NZ immigration Office in their high tower down in Bangkok central. I asked Bangkok how many New Zealanders they had in the primary application Office . / None.

    In the Key Government we have had three Ministers of Immigration Nathan Guy, Jonathon Coleman, and now Michael Woodhouse. I have not been able to elicit anything but happy advertisements for Immigration from them..
    This portfolio seems like a soft stepping stone... We need to put New Zealanders on the face of immigration from foreign ports .
    That is where I will be taking my efforts. Immigration Department can not stop Permanent residence upgrade without criminal conviction. People, here come Winston Peters.

    1. Also, pursuant to my attitude, I received some very nasty facebook comments over the weekend. Then the stuff written in Arabic which would not translate well. I changed my google address to Bangkok. Paul Scott, another frightened Westerner.

  2. Parisians have been quoted that they were expecting some sort of attack. It was only a matter of when. This is what happens when you have a large Islamic population in a developed society.

    Not long ago I tried to point out that countries in Europe have problems in proportion to the number of Muslim residents. The response was that there is no evidence of this.

    I can only assume that you get it now and have revised your stance on Islamic immigration accordingly.

    1. @Barry: The response was to ask you for your evidence.
      I invite you to respond to Dan Holloway's point (above). And to the fact that (once again) these appear to be attacks not by poor folk who've just dropped in, but planned long in advance and carried out by folks who were born and raised in Europe.

    2. No Islamic immigration > no Islamic population > no terror attacks.

      Doesn't matter whether Muslims start their Jihad on arrival or whether it takes a generation. To prevent terrorism you keep them out of your country.

    3. As simple as 1 + 1 = 2, Barry, and should be as easily understood. It boggles my mind that it isn't.

  3. The greatest lesson to learn is that Islam is the problem. Not ISIS.

  4. Dan Halloway's point. If you have a bowl full of jellybeans in front of you, and 12 of them contain deadly poison, would you dip in? Would you pass them out to the kids at the christmas party? Toss them out in the lolly scramble? What is more important. Your life and the lives of your children, or that you don't discriminate against Jellybeans? There is a lot of tragedy in the world, but that doesn't mean we have to altruistically commit suicide because of it. Islam is not compatible with a free society, and we are at war. Dan Halloway will ensure that many massacres are committed. I fear that France, and perhaps Europe as a whole, is now too far down the multiculturalist, altruistic relativist path to save itself. Hopefully I'm wrong, but Dan Halloway won't be the one turning things around. The likes of Geert Wilders will be the ones who save Europe.

  5. They weren't just "carried out by folks born and raised in Europe." Two of them arrived as refugees. Back in February Islamic State said they were going to flood Europe with refugees and bring fighters in with them. This is exactly what they have done, and this attack is just a taste of things to come. Why, when we are at war, would you want to aid them? What are your motives in taking the position you take?

  6. Thanks for the Robert Tracinski link. A good and helpful summary of these two theologies. It explains why Islam is simply not a fit in the west.


  7. The argument is not about banning immigrants (since that's as impossible as , or (since that would be a necessary part of your strategy) sending "home" everyone who's ever emigrated over the last three genereations; it is to ask why those who have emigrated have not embraced western Enlightenment values.

    You can no more ban immigration outright than you ban the consumption of recreational drugs-and if your terrorists from outside want to come in, they will find a way in. And (since this has to be a necessary part of your 'strategy') no more is it possible to deport three generations of people who've already made the west their home while rejecting western values. (Although it's more accurate to say that the generation *following* immigration has rejected them.)

    Note this: Every single attack we've seen has been led and primarily carried out not by new immigrants to Europe, but by educated, outwardly-westernised jihadis who grew up there. So the only real question is not the wholly unrealistic one of sending "home" everyone who's ever emigrated over the last three genereations; it is to ask why those who have emigrated have not embraced western Enlightenment values.

    And one big part of that answer is to recognise how many in the west have already abandoned them, or disparaged them, or at least demonstrated to newcomers that there is nothing important about them, nothing about them to respect, and precious little to embrace. Combine that with the multicultural promotion of the idea at that all cultures -- from those that built the stone age to those that built the Enlightenment -- are all equal, and the question becomes easier to answer.

    But the real job is to overturn those presumptions.

    1. Like Barry said: It doesn't matter whether Muslims launch attacks days after arriving or whether it's their children who end up carrying out the attacks. Sensible immigration policy is to keep the fuckers out. It is nonsense to say that it's impossible.

      What part of common sense immigration policy don't you understand?

    2. Yes, it is nonsense to say that it's impossible. Also, no one wants to ban immigration. Selective immigration is the aim. There's absolutely no reason to keep out people who value liberty and want to stand on their own two feet rather than lean on the state. Galt's Gulch wasn't open slather, and for very good reason.

    3. @Barry: "It is certainly not impossible to keep them out."
      Well, it certainly is impossible to keep out those that want to get in to do harm (although evidence shows once again that this wasn't an attack by refugees or recent immigrants). Best way to stop that however is to enlist on your side those who so know the evil-doers best. And it's certainly beyond impossible to deport all those generations already in Europe, which is what your 'plan' requires...

      "Why do you think they're flooding into Europe and not Saudi Arabia?"
      Well, apart from the 2.5 million refugees who've gone there since the start of the conflict...

      "Can you find an example of a Muslim who 'saw the light' of western society and became an atheist? "
      Well, Ayaan Hirsi Ali springs immediately to mind, as it should have to yours...

      YOu know, Barry, you continue to parrot factoids that aren't true to bolstetr arguments that hold no water.

      There is a serious argument about this matter to be had, but not wth someone willing just to make shit up -- or to have it made up for him.

    4. Unfortunately I don't have any evidence that is up to your standard PC - such as the anonymous Saudi minister quoted in the article you linked to that apparently proves they've taken 2.5 million refugees. And then you accuse me of parroting factoids that aren't true. Hilarious.

      You dismissed Richards comment on two of the attackers being refugees as not significant enough. But 1 Muslim convert out of 1.6 billion somehow is.

      Your reasoning on this issue continues to be a complete mess.

  8. The Marxist in the White House is called President Zero because he stands for destruction of the good for being the good. He acts as a muslim, and most definitely is anti-American.

    One should check one’s context when one finds oneself on the same side as Zero the Nihilist.

    Nihilist speak: "When I heard political leaders suggest that there would be a religious test for which a person who's fleeing a warn-torn country is admitted...that's shameful," Obama said, growing visibly heated. "That's not American. That's not who we are. We don't have religious tests to our compassion."

    The Paris bombers are muslims. It is deflection to claim they were resident and not refugees. That barely matters. Your values of freedom do not come at a compromise of your right to life.

    Zero wants to destroy America, and to fast-track that with the scum of the Earth is his priority.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.