Tags
America, America 911, American Liberty, Barack Obama, BBC, Britain First, Christianity and Islam, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, ISIS, ISIS paris, ISIS responsibility, ISIS twitter, Islam Europe, Islam in Europe, Islamic State, Multiculturalism, Muslims, Paris, Paris Attacks, paris attacks reaction, paris bombs, paris facebook, paris terrorist attacks, United States
What a breathless charge of hatred Friday evening saw… The sheerest malevolence driving towards the innocent at a hundred miles an hour. The chaos left behind is nightmarish. Bodies strewn on the streets; sporting events and classical concerts cancelled, morgues inundated with cooling bodies, clouds of gunsmoke and burnt explosives washing over the streets of Sartre, Husymans and De Beauvoir. 127 people (this is the figure at the time of writing) have perished, most of them young, most of them middle-class. We can assume from such data that many of them will have been liberal, even towards Islam. How cruel, how very awful it is that they have been made to depart in the process learning the vital truth of our age.
What truth? The truth that Islam is violent – and that Muslims are themselves violent in proportion to how much credence they give their religious beliefs. This is the unvarnished reality. I am very tired of hearing the ‘not all Muslims are terrorists’ talking-point. While terrorists don’t yet comprise a majority in the Ummah, the true proportion is markedly higher than the 2-3% fabricated by our political elite. You don’t need to be dead on the ground, surrounded by shards of glass and puddles of blood to be called a terrorist. All suicide bombers were alive once. They smiled once. They had jobs once. Likewise, many ‘ordinary’ Muslims walking beside us today will end up trying to kill us. As to why they behave this way, the lies simply won’t work anymore. Beyond all those block-headed and absurd analogies with abortion clinic bombings, the truth remains that Islamic violence really has no equivalent in other faiths. Most religions have modernised, re-examined their doctrines and tamed their believers. Islam, by terrible contrast, actively resists even the most moderate alterations to its foundational dogmas. For this reason, the modern world must resist its incorporation as actively as one would resist imbibing a fatal poison.
Have we learnt anything new from Paris’s nightmare? Not really. ISIS has today claimed responsibility for the attack, but this was largely a waste of energy. We knew who was responsible from the moment the story broke. Indeed, since we have opened our borders to ISIS-infested Syria for the best part of a year, the only wonder is why this hasn’t happened before now.
While some of our head-in-the-sand celebrity class may have learnt a lesson, the chances are it’s already been beaten out of them. The respected comedian Jason Manford, a very liberal personality, had his whole Facebook profile deleted after posting the following ‘outburst’:
“Slaughtering innocent unarmed people for what? Families and children enjoying life, theatre, meals? For what? In whose name? Are you doing this in the name of your God? Cos I’ve got news for you. If you think your ‘God’ is gonna reward you for this type of atrocity then your God is a massive cunt. I hope you are all caught and murdered in a similar agonising way you fucking scumbags.”
I can’t see much to be ashamed of in Manford’s reaction. Can you? But that doesn’t matter. We are expected – commanded even – to forget the facts, overlook the well-established reality, and make sure not to offend the people cocking AK-47s in toilets waiting to launch massacres. All else is fascism.
This kind of mass-folly is unsustainable. Europe will always be incompatible with Islam. On this matter, the people already know better than the government. Moderating propaganda will always be futile. Instead of lying to us, our elected representatives (in step with the public) must be brave, come together and talk without censorship about the unpleasant realities of Islamic immigration.
Only when we admit to having a problem can we begin to do something about it. And after Paris, Rotherham, New York, Washington, Madrid, Jerusalem, Tunisia, Benghazi, London, Glasgow, Moscow, Mumbai, Sydney, Beslan, Fort Hood, Stockholm and Argentina… anyone who denies that we have a problem is a fool at best, an enemy at worst.
D, LDN
Defend the Modern World 
Thanks for this post.
I hope peoples of Europe will open their eyes soon. This has to stop.
LikeLike
I think the people are (by and large) already awake. Our leaders are blind, deaf and dumb. We need new leaders.
LikeLike
ISIS say this attack is the start of a longer campaign. Our leaders can’t adopt the naïve pose indefinitely.
LikeLike
Why do we ask, ” Why ” ? They kill French civilians because they confess to being democrats and therefore responsible for the actions of the French government.They kill because they follow a religion that seems to be all about bodily functions, mutilation and an absurd sexist idea of paradise.They kill because they are from the middle east.Questioning and debate is useless now.Muslims must be removed from Europe now.We can clear England; how many in the T.A.?
Got a better solution? I’m listening.
Mike.
LikeLike
I agree. This is a very tough issue. We are going to have to consider very unpleasant policies if we are to get ourselves out of this mess.
LikeLike
What is the TA?
LikeLike
I believe he means the Territorial Army.
LikeLike
Could be wrong.
LikeLike
I meant the Territorial Army.I understand it is now called the reserve army but the initials T.A. are still used because so many people like that name, especially crossword compilers.O.K.?
LikeLike
Thought so.
LikeLike
I don’t think people are awake. I’ve noticed in response to this latest horrific attack that social media is full of comments along the lines of “Islam is a religion of peace”, “Islam means peace”, “these were not muslims” or “I will not watch any more news as it will only be the government trying to create hate ” . These are the views of educated British people. They have been as brain washed as the jihadis only in different ideologies of multiculturalism and liberalisum . The brain washing was done by the state (mainly labour) our education system and the BBC, not by hate preachers. It is a combination that is lethal to Europe.
LikeLike
The people you talk of are a loud minority. They believe that only their view counts. They’re wrong. Most people know the truth and are becoming less shy about stating it.
LikeLike
I’ve also noticed those people have been pointing to our lack of outrage when non-Western cities are attacked That’s truly remarkable, since we are forbidden from condemning any such attack by the same people.
LikeLike
Marvellous stuff. The masses are definitely getting the message now. Not so much the chattering classes though. On ‘Broadcasting House’ on Radio Four this morning the press review panel, all three of them liberals, were bleating indignantly about headlines in the ‘Mail on Sunday’ and the ‘Sunday Express’ that noted the connection between immigration and terrorism. I wonder what it would take for even the BBC to frankly confront the realities of Islamic terrorism?
LikeLike
The BBC will never face reality. Other elements of the press are doing so (albeit slowly). Our newspapers (as the BBC complain) are almost in step with popular sentiment.
LikeLike
The papers still have a way to go.
LikeLike
Yes, there is a very loud and clear message disseminating on social media from the Left – and a particular trending message is about being ashamed for not caring about the other recent massacres, in the same vein.
The point is that they themselves did not know about these other massacres till they were alerted on social media, and to keep ahead of the curve, and post something that is beyond a French flag, or an Eiffel Tower peace symbol, they need a new status that will get traction … and as such prove themselves to be sheep.
Exactly whom are they trying to shame?
Themselves?
It seems to be a national pastime to induce shame if you are from the left.
Facebook itself has been “shamed” for not activating their “safe” feature a week earlier in light of the massacres in Beirut, shamed even though the Friday night attacks are the first time they have used the feature in the case of terrorism attack (normally it is used in response to a natural disaster).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. Who among these Leftists offered so much as a word on the Lebanon attack before the Paris attack?
LikeLike
I commented on 2 UK govt. petitions a while ago. There is now another anti-immigration petition that is getting an astonishing number of signatures following the Paris attacks (23203 in a single day yesterday for example) . Today (at 392,625) it looks set to overtake the pro-“refugee” petition that was urging us to take more asylum seekers but now is only getting a slow trickle of extra signatures (443,213).
The wording of this one is different, it is only calling for a temporary halt to immigration until ‘IS is defeated’. However I think people should sign it because it has momentum, and if it got over a million it might actually cause a rather more constructive debate to finally take place in parliament.
Here is the link:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/107516
Please sign it if you haven’t already done so.
Note the earlier anti-immigration petition has also seen a surge in signatures but not nearly as much.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s good.
LikeLike
Am I right in thinking that if a petition gets 100,000 signatures, it has to be debated in parliament? That would be interesting.
LikeLike
It will be “considered for debate” at 100,000 signatures. I don’t think there is any obligation – especially if it’s something awkward that they would rather not debate!
LikeLike
Great. And I bet they’ll ‘consider’ it for all of five seconds.
I hope they get petition after petition until they can’t resist any longer. As a tactic, petitioning still has a better chance of success than anything else currently available to us.
LikeLike
Good articles from you all the time, David.
Over here at the (“re-branded”) forum I consider what the West could practically do to remove Islam, even if there were the will – not an easy matter when it comes down to it. http://westerndefence.org/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=3754
It’s hard to be able to gauge the public consciousness, isn’t? A lot of leftists are still in denial and we had the Greens saying today that they are going to use “the weapon ISIS fears most: peace talks” – insane delusion. But on the other hand the narrative that “Islam is peaceful” seems to be breaking down fast under sheer weight of obvious facts from both real life and, perhaps most importantly, the Qur’an itself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gavin,
The new forum looks fantastic. I love the header and the name. I think you will draw in a far wider audience with this. As much as I like Mr Dalrymple, he is not as well known as our general plight. If I figure out how to make a ‘blog roll’, I’ll add your site at the top. I’ve no idea how to do this. I don’t even know if there’s room on my page. The best of luck with it.
LikeLike
I hope you’re right about the narrative breaking down. I must say I have been a little discouraged by the speed with which the news-media seems to have moved on from Paris. It was only a few days ago, but some people are already back to talking about Tax credits.
LikeLike
Governments can’t remove Islam now. It’s too late.
Only people can. Individual people, acting spontaneously. Once the state ceases to uphold the social contract, the People are morally entitled (I would even say obliged) to act. But it will be horrible. The state’s monopoly on violence would have to be washed away by sheer numbers of furious citizens.
But that will only happen once the citizenry feel that the costs of inaction outweigh the costs of decisive action. That won’t happen until it gets much, much worse. If Rotherham didn’t do it, the outrages will have to become so much more prevalent before the people act.
LikeLike
I think it’s hard to tell whether a government really *can’t* remove Islam or whether it would always lack the will. Governments have certainly removed millions of people in the past, though this has usually been brutal. But I agree the government would not implement anything like this without there first being overwhelming public demand. At the moment demand is not high enough and virtually no politicians will even identify Islam as a problem.
Regarding the public doing anything themselves, even making such support clear, I think you are right that matters would need to go a lot further. (The possibility of people removing Islam themselves is discussed in the second post at that thread.)
I often wonder what it might take. Most to whom I have spoken believe that nothing will make the majority do anything (even vote UKIP!) until their own lives are in direct mortal danger. Not just a possibility of being killed but a strong probability. This means they will give away their streets, schools, housing, jobs, welfare, they’ll eat halal, and they’ll become a cultural (even linguistic) minority in their own country before they will object to Islamification. Possibly only once they are in the subordinate position of kaffir and paying jizya at risk of death might they decide they need to put a stop to it.
That may be true of decent hard-working accountants, as Paul Weston has put it. But thanks to general left-wing policies we also have a massive native underclass who no doubt feel rather resentful. I wonder what would happen if Muslims pushed it too far with another atrocity (some seem unable to resist the call to jihad when they would be better advised to keep their heads down and keep having children) – perhaps an attack on the Royals. This could trigger some mosque burning – and world wars have shown us that matters can very fast spiral out of control from there.
It’s a frightening time and it should never have got this far. If only welfare had never been offered and politicians had understood what Islam stood for and outlawed it from the beginning. I don’t think anybody knows how it will play out from here, but if the number of Muslims does continue to grow then civil war seems a strong possibility.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I saw a hilarious episode of the BBC comedy series “Newsnight” tonight. During the program intrepid “journalists” discovered that the source of the problem is BELGIUM. For one thing, more Jihadis leave that country to join the “so-called so-called” Islamic State than from any other European country. Half of the Paris attackers came from BELGIUM, including the mastermind! Also, apparently, BELGIUM has a security problem!! Overwhelming proof, if proof were needed, that the source of the problem is BELGIUM. No doubt it is purely a coincidence that the EU parliament is housed in the capital of that country. The drum beat for strikes on BELGIUM is getting louder. All we need to do then is to launch a tactical nuclear strike on BELGIUM, and all will be well.
Belgians please note – this is a satirical joke, I am not seriously suggesting that any of the readers launch a nuclear strike on your country. I doubt if any of them have any nukes anyway, to be honest…
LikeLiked by 1 person
It all makes sense now. Belgium – the fountain of Jihad. To think we’ve been focused on Syria.
LikeLike
Follow japan model
Islamic Terrorism: Why There Is None in Japan
http://chersonandmolschky.com/2015/04/13/islamic-terrorism-japan/
Islam, Pop culture and the demographic demon
http://5forty3.in/2015/01/islam-pop-culture-and-the-demographic-demon/
goal of muslim immigration
http://chersonandmolschky.com/2013/10/02/goalofmuslimimmigration/
LikeLike
If only our left-wing establishment would allow us to follow that model.
LikeLike