Paris press montage 2
Extremism

Paris attacks: "They are cutting us all down, one by one."

 

World leaders will today wear their best grave faces and pronounce their most solemn sympathies. There will be a chorus of condemnation with a recapitulation of our common humanity. Paris is in mourning, the world is in shock, and the Prime minister will chair a meeting of COBRA. They will say that these weren’t Muslims, but terrorists. And they will preach that terrorism has no religion, because religion, true religion, is about wonder, love and dews of peace.

“They are cutting us all down, one by one,” tweeted eyewitness and victim Benjamin Cazenoves. The enemy is not banging at the gate: we have welcomed him in through the front door, and gifted him free board and lodging. He repays us with horror, terror, death and destruction. We can’t say we weren’t warned. “Our sufferings today are the prelude of those you, Europeans and Western Christians, will also suffer in the near future,” said Emil Nona, Chaldean Catholic Archbishop of Mosul, exiled in Erbil. “Please, try to understand us,” he pleaded. “Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here. You must consider again our reality in the Middle East, because you are welcoming in your countries an ever growing number of Muslims. Also you are in danger. You must take strong and courageous decisions, even at the cost of contradicting your principles. You think all men are equal, but that is not true: Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values are not their values. If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the enemy you have welcomed in your home.”

Our freedoms are being eroded, our values confounded, our civilisation defeated. Killing the Islamists one by one will not end the carnage: they want to die; they are eager for death. We must tackle Islamism at its theo-political, socio-ideological, spiritual-inspirational source. But that requires some unpalatable truths to be told by a few prophets, and we don’t like to listen to prophets because they tell unpalatable truths. Far easier to listen to the grave-faced politicians intoning their most solemn sympathies, and finding comfort in the Prime Minister’s chairing of COBRA.

10 years ago, in the wake of the 7/7 London bombings, when Boris Johnson was not a frivolous politician but a serious journalist, he wrote a piece for the Spectator entitled ‘Just don’t call it war‘. “It is time,” the sub-editor summarised, “to reassert British values in the face of extremist Islam”. But Boris Johnson went much further than that. Consider:

..we are novices not just at dealing with suicide bombers, but with suicide bombers as British as the fish-and-chip shops in which they grew up. They were born in our NHS, these killers. They were coddled by our welfare state, they were fed on our butties and our Spangles, they played cricket on our glum and bemerded streets. They were washed by the rains and blessed by the suns of home.

..The threat from Islamicist nutters preceded 9/11; they bombed the Paris Métro in the 1990s; and it is evident that the threat to British lives pre-dates the Iraq war, when you think that roughly the same number of Britons died in the World Trade Center as died in last week’s bombings.

..You can’t claim to be draining the swamp in the Middle East when the mosquitoes are breeding quite happily in Yorkshire.

..We — non-Muslims — cannot solve the problem; we cannot brainwash them out of their fundamentalist beliefs. The Islamicists last week horribly and irrefutably asserted the supreme importance of that faith, overriding all worldly considerations, and it will take a huge effort of courage and skill to win round the many thousands of British Muslims who are in a similar state of alienation, and to make them see that their faith must be compatible with British values and with loyalty to Britain. That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem.

..To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers.

..The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?

The problem is Islam? Islam is the problem? He wouldn’t say that now, of course: the sophist-politician has triumphed over the journalist-prophet. But he was right then, and his clear-cut words are written down for posterity; words which, were he to write them today, would surely get him suspended from the back benches, deselected from the Approved List of Candidates or sacked from the Cabinet, were he to be in it. The Twitter storm would be intolerable: appalling racism, islamophobia, cultural ignorance, religious bigotry..

Politicians don’t want to know about sectarian strains of Salifism or wings of Wahhabism. They don’t want to delve into quranic scholarship or debate the historical legitimacy of the Hadith. They don’t grasp the Islamic theology of aberrational innovation versus the ‘pure’ Islam of their prophet Mohammed and his companions. And so, for want of speakers of truth about the nature of Islam and the inspiration of the jihadi mindset, we must go on enduring carnage, death and terror. They will continue cutting us down, one by one, until we are led by religiously-literate and spiritually-quickened politicians who will confront the historical, theological and intellectual inspiration of this evil ideology, instead of just waiting to intone another chorus of grave-faced sympathies when the Paris attacks are reenacted on the streets of London, as they surely one day will be.

  • The Explorer

    It’s all the fault of Judaism and Christianity. Without them, there wouldn’t have been Islam.

    • Stig

      It is all the fault of Adam and Eve. Without them there would have been no sin!

      • TrippingDwarves

        It’s all the fault of God! Without him, there’d be no world.

    • Royinsouthwest

      If Mohammed had accepted either Christianity or Judaism this problem would not have arisen. He accepted the general history of those two regions, with certain very important exceptions, but discarded their texts and added his own message.

  • dannybhoy

    “And there was a trembling in the camp, in the field, and among all the people. Even the garrison and the raiders trembled, and the earth quaked so that it became a great trembling.”
    1 Samuel 14:15 (NASB)

    Indeed. Just contrast this horror and loss of life with the scenes recently welcoming these/refugees/economic migrants into Europe..

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11847545/Migrant-crisis-Refugees-welcomed-in-Germany-like-war-heroes-as-Berlin-expects-10000-in-one-day.html

    http://news.sky.com/story/1547326/germany-no-limit-to-refugees-well-take-in

    Our forbears knew the dangers, but we knew better than our forbears…

  • Inspector General

    Come Monday, business as usual. The French state will again be sending out the letters to North Africa. “Dear Sir. Congratulations. Your application to become a French citizen has been accepted. Welcome to France. We look forward to seeing you, your wife (wives) and children…”

    • Politically__Incorrect

      I was watching the BBC coverage last night on Newsnight. The general attitude was: ” We’re not surprised. We’ve been expecting this. It was going to happen. Well it’s happened now, so let us (the ones still alive) get on with life and not worry about it”. Almost like some of them have a death wish, a sense of fatalism with no hope of respite. What a dismal attitude some of them have.

      • Inspector General

        There’s merit in that approach. Every year there is a toll of carnage from our love affair with the car. No one minds, not in the long run, because the alternative, cars limited to a speed of 20 mph would be unthinkable.

        Look forward to the time when our politicians go to election promising to keep the annual body count from Islamic terrorism to double figures. No one would mind, not in the long run, because the alternative…

    • Sigfridiii

      Come Monday, business as usual in Downing Street.

  • Politically__Incorrect

    Reading the DT this morning they were trying to make sense of the attack. Their analysis of eth cause was basically that France has a few thousand troops deployed around the world trying to defeat Islamic extremism. Oh, and France’s track record on integration isn’t very good. Right…

    For a better explanation I would recommend Melvyn Tinkers book “A lost God in a lost World”. In the first part of the book he talks about the “fatality of Idolatry”. He quotes from Isaiah – “He feeds on ashes, a deluded heart misleads him. He cannot save himself or say ‘Is not this thing in my hand a lie?’

    The idol I am talking about is what we may call social engineering; the delusion that different cultures and religions can be forced to live together under an umbrella of so-called tolerance. In fact, it is not tolernace at all. It is simply the silencing of one side so that they cannot complain they are being ignored. This is the idol that is dear to the “enlightened” liberal who believes religion is all hocus-pocus and superstition, and it just needs some non-believing oversight to get us to live together in happiness. That is the idol. It is man-made. It is worthless, and as Tinker points out, it is fatal.

  • The politicians and media have for the last 50 years displayed their imagined virtue to all by embracing the doctrines of multiculturalism, but this fashionable secularist creed always was a consequence of the plain rejection of the Christian revelation.

    Scripture clearly teaches that there is no salvation and no hope for man outside of faith in Jesus Christ. We love our neighbours of other faiths, but part of that love means telling them that they must turn to Christ as the only way and that their own way cannot help them.

    Likewise as a nation, whilst we grant freedom to worship to all faiths, there must be a national identification with the one true faith of Christ, or else we forfeit God’s blessing. The Government’s ‘ British values’ initiative denies this fundamental need.

    It must also be stressed that nations with controlled borders are a Biblical ordinance, and here the churches have again let down the nation by teaching otherwise, by confusing the kingdom of God made up of those of every tribe with the never rescinded ordinance of the nation state, which has been God’s will for a fallen world ever since the time of the Tower of Babel.

    So, as Christians giving counsel on how to deal with the terrorist threat, we must advocate strict control of borders and reject the ludicrous notion that there is something ‘un-Christian’ about so doing. We must also prize our Christianity-based civilisation as being worthy of the most vigorous defence.

    • David

      Well said Pastor Peter.

    • tiger

      May I add to your excellent synopsis. The modern idol is money – wealth. Men/Women are valued by their wealth and not their virtue. In times gone by and not very long ago men were evaluated by their behaviour against Judeo-Christian norms.
      Much our modern secularists and politicians worship wealth. The drive for wealth means the need for ever cheaper labour to work in the “mills” which provides greater profits and more wealth. The desire of the employer to ensure that his employees receive a fair days wage for a fair days work have been sacrificed on the alter of the money god.
      Have we not seen the disaster that has just befallen many of the weakest in our society because the greedy were bent and criminal in their decisions that resulted in the financial crash in 2009.

      • “The modern idol is money” vs. “Judeo-Christian norms”

        Is there not a contradiction here? I thought Jesus threw the money lenders out of the temple, and then they crucified him for his impertinence. What’s this “Judeo-Christian” all about? I see it popping up an awful lot on comment threads these days. Don’t remember hearing it when I was a kid.

        • tiger

          Judeo-Christian illustrates the path of our religion. Starting with the Old Testament and ending with the New Testament.
          Moses came down from the Mountain and told the masses that there was only one God and worship of Idols other than God was a sin (Old Testament).
          Jesus attacked the money lenders not because of their trade but because they were trading in the Temple which is the house of God. There is no contradiction.
          Christ was crucified for the claim of being King of the Jews and son of the one true God.

  • Anton

    “that requires some unpalatable truths to be told by a few prophets, and we don’t like to listen to prophets because they tell unpalatable truths”

    Prophets are licensed by God to speak His words in the first person, but that is not necessary here. You, Your Grace, are saying exactly what needs to be said, and so are many persons who contribute to the threads here on this subject. Also, prophets speak to God’s people, ie the church, whereas these words need saying to the nation and its leaders.

    I think that those decade-old scales might fall from Boris’ eyes if or when London cops it. As for Theresa May, What might it take for her to single out the specific politico-religious system that is doing these things, rather than prating about “extremists” and defining such a category so as to include many entirely law-abiding churchgoers?

    • chiefofsinners

      Is there any way we could get that last sentence of Anton’s onto every billboard in the land?

    • TrippingDwarves

      But what does Benedict Cumberbatch think? Isn’t that what really matters here?

  • Dreadnaught

    Well said Cranmer; and not for the first time have you encapsulated the essence of the issue before us.
    There are already rumblings of its only a tiny minority and nothing to do with Muslims. Yes it was only eight men, prepared to blow themselves up and deprive investigators of interrogating them. That is a truly terrifying weapon to use on unsuspecting civilians.
    What the apologist never want to recognise is that these suicide assassins were Muslims before they were terrorists. Before they were Muslims they were babes in arms before being indoctrinated into Islam. Its not an impossible trail to follow.

    Never mind about Muslim sensitivities; that is the seed bed from which all terrorist in this war on us germinates.

    Those assassins were only a train ride from the heart of London. They could just as easily carried out their murderous attack here and carried their armoury in suitcases or back-packs without any security checks in Paris.

    There will be others already here, as they have proved , prepared to travel on the Tube and blow themselves up along with anyone else on that train.

    We have to starting flush them out now. Toughen up. Bring in the Troops. Stop any more Muslims from migrating here. Close the Mosques. Close the Madrassas and start deportations now and bring back the death penalty for Terrorists. Only when Muslims have proved themselves not to be the enemy should we consider easing off.

    • tiger

      Perhaps the death penalty for terrorists is a bit harsh. Its what they most desire; being a “martyr”. Perhaps orange jump suits, cages and bacon, for breakfast, ham for lunch and pork chops for supper is a better punishment.

      • Inspector General

        Actually, no. Islamic terrorists do fear swinging on the end of a rope. To be a martyr, you must die in action….

  • Inspector General

    Why is it that if a fellow from another country wants to come and live in the West, that is not only alright, but a good thing. Yet if the same fellow wants to come and live with your wife, it is not.

    • Inspector General

      He comes over, with his children. He brings the book of evil he was schooled on with him. He tells his sons they now live in an infidel country, and the population are as dogs. He implores his sons to send the country to hell, to give it to his monstrous deity, Allah.

  • Anton

    Statement by ISIS:

    …a group of believers and soldiers of the caliphate… targeted the capital of abomination and perversion, the one that carries the banner of the cross in Europe, Paris.

    They could do with a better understanding of the French Revolution!

    • Inspector General

      Anything about John?

    • Albert

      So can we infer from that, that this was partly an anti-Christian attack (at least in terms of intention)?

      • Anton

        That’s what I’d infer.

        • Albert

          Well thank you for picking that point up. I think we need to be cognisant of it.

  • Fred

    Your french is rubbish. He did not say “they are cutting down all the world”. In French the word “tout le monde” means “everyone”. So he said “they are killing everyone”.

    • Dreadnaught

      FRED Please change your name to DICK

      • Fred

        There is a bit of a difference. “They are killing all the world” seems a bit excessive don’t you think.

        • Politically__Incorrect

          .. and killing 128 and critically wounding a further 99 isn’t excessive of course. Still, the important thing is to get our Frech grammar right.

          • Fred

            Of course. And it’s French not “Frech”.

  • preacher

    Another massacre by the deluded on the helpless & that changed what? Did the French people capitulate? Did the Western World collapse & grovel in fear – No!
    We’ve seen it all before, World Domination is as old as the World itself.
    Genghis Khan, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Hitler & so ad infinitum.
    Many died resisting the despots, & regrettably, many more will before the current threat is vanquished.
    Those shadow men behind the current outrages will continue to squander the lives of their followers & the innocent while trying to achieve the impossible.
    The World will resist all attempts to enslave the free with all it possesses.
    Hitler’s war machine was huge, his armies fearsome & for a time it seemed all was lost – But where is he & his forces now?.
    Force of arms will never succeed, & if in some way it could, the ‘Victors’ would turn on each other & consume one another in their avarice to be ‘top of the tree’.
    Historical precedent? the start of, & the continuing hatred between Shia & Sunni branches of Islam, over who was the rightful successor to Mohammed.

    As an old song asks “When will they ever learn?” – the answer in a more contemporary one is “He’ll (Jesus) replace wrong with right when He returns”.
    Amen.

    • Sigfridiii

      The Third Reich collapsed because it quite simply did not have enough soldiers to sustain its ambitions. Unlike this ideology, which already has many millions consolidating its enclaves in our cities.

  • Notforinfants

    The British government must begin to understand that indiscriminate and uncontrolled immigration which is EU driven policy is a threat to national security as the tragic events in Paris illustrate. For Mr Cameron that understanding should inform his impending ‘negotiations’ with the EU and other member states, and will reflect something of reality instead of the vague and nonsensical propositions he has put forward.
    It is a truism that immigration (on the present scale) without assimilation is invasion.

    In the light of the tragedy in Paris this should concentrate the mind of Mr Cameron who on the same grounds of national security should immediately reverse the existing indiscriminate and uncontrolled open door policy and severely restrict all inward immigration to: A. Genuine asylum seekers fleeing war and persecution.
    B. Selected professional and qualified immigrants who would positively benefit UK national life. C. EXCLUDE all unemployed, and/or unemployable applicants with no real job prospects before arriving in the UK.
    These are the basic elements of a safe and reasonable immigration policy which Mr Cameron should now lay down as British official policy, and amend the European Community Act accordingly, notwithstanding EU “law”, which is inimical to our democracy and national security.
    Unfortunately on his present track record he has neither the principle nor backbone to implement such a policy.

    • Manfarang

      From outside the EU immigration is restricted. Millions of Britons live in EU countries under its freedom of movement.

      • G. P. Brown

        And hopefully they will stay there rather than scuttle back in their dotage as most seem to when ill or their other half passes on, having taken their cash and spending power out of the country to be replaced in the nett immigration figures by people mostly with nothing!

        A pity we will not be able to bar them from returning after Brexit.

        • Manfarang

          If you have a choice between the dole and a job in Europe, what would you do?
          If you have a choice between being unemployed In South Africa and getting a job in Britain,what would you do?

          • G. P. Brown

            Please explain therefore why so many “Europeans” are rushing here to find jobs that you believe do not exist in the U.K.
            Are you talking South African dentists etc. who can obtain a position and probably legal entry or those just wishing for a better life?

          • Manfarang

            Aren’t those Europeans heading here for benefits?
            No I’m talking about South Africans with British passports who have been adversely affected by “affirmative action”.

          • G. P. Brown

            Don’t you listen to what the BBC tells you?
            The Europeans are apparently net contributors to our economy seemingly so we should be inviting millions more in on that basis!
            South Africans with British passports – isn’t that a contradiction in terms after all these years of separation?

          • Manfarang

            No its not a contradiction. Anyway if your grandparents were born in the UK and both you and your parents are South African born, then you are entitled to an Ancestral visa.

          • G. P. Brown

            So with a bit of luck that right of back door entry is quickly “dying” off.

          • Manfarang

            Front door. I know a young Canadian who was considering making an application, but his wife suddenly was given a visa for Canada.
            There are millions in Britain who would emigrate if they could.

          • G. P. Brown

            “I know a young Canadian who was considering making an application, but his wife
            suddenly was given a visa for Canada”
            ??

          • Manfarang

            His wife wasn’t Canadian.

          • G. P. Brown

            Are you trying to say the Canadian wanted to come to the U.K. to be with his wife and that Canada is not stupid enough to automatically grant entry to foreign wives of Canadians

          • Manfarang

            No. He wanted to come to the UK because he believed he could more easily find a job that matched his qualifications.His wife has never been anywhere near the UK. After a few months in Canada he found a good job as did his wife.

    • dannybhoy

      Politicians are in the main a special people, dedicated to the belief that they know what is best for the rest of us.
      They have the added assurance that if they get it wrong, and many innocent people die as a result of their decisions…
      Well; they’ll lose the next election, get their pension and write their memoirs…

  • grutchyngfysch

    How quickly does the Arab Spring turn to the Western Fall.

    • dannybhoy

      The Arab Spring was encouraged by the muddled thinking of the Western world. Having abandoned the Christian understanding of rebellious human nature and the depths to which it can sink without God, they foolishly/deliberately assumed that all religions are of equal worth. They tried to promote humanistic ideals onto deeply religious peoples, and encouraged them to find freedom from oppression.
      The sad thing is that real freedom comes from being in a right relationship with God, and anything else is bondage to lesser gods…

  • David

    Islam is totally incompatible with the west. There will be no peace now with these colonies growing in our midst. The moral and cultural relativists who naively, and on the basis of absolutely no well researched evidence, only their own immature dreams list, preached multiculturalism to us were always utterly, utterly wrong.
    Citizens of other Christian heritage countries will integrate, but of those from Islamic backgrounds few will truly integrate. Even if they do partially, outwardly, conform, there is always the potential that their children or grandchildren and great grandchildren will turn against their host nation. Because they know us well their acts of violence will be even more effective and deadly.
    The west needs to rediscover its own cultural roots, from violent Paganism through various stages of Christianity, the Renaissance, the Reformation and the Enlightenment to where we are today. Then it may begin to appreciate that importing peoples en mass from cultures that have not experienced similar journeys, can only result in social tensions if not downright tragedy.
    Our ancestors laboured and fought to keep the west free from this culture. But our cultural, political and even Church elites, thought they knew better than their forbears. Well they didn’t ! They were utterly wrong. Now ordinary men, women and children will pay the price. Dark, difficult decades, if not centuries, stretch in front of the west – if it survives at all ! Oh how much our political leaders and the cultural elites have thrown away !
    I hope that a new more vigorous and stronger elite forms, and then acts to save the greatest civilisation that this world has ever seen. But first society needs humility to admit its mistakes, to seek truth and to turn our faces once more to the Judaeo-Christain God who helped us in the past.

    • Manfarang

      How many demonstrators were killed in the massacre on the Saint-Michel bridge is still unclear, but estimates range from 70 to 200 people. In the absence of official estimates, the placard which commemorates the massacre stated: “In memory of the many Algerians killed during the bloody repression of the peaceful demonstration of 17 October 1961”.

  • Inspector General

    Just out of interest, is there anybody on this site NOT going to vote to leave the EU and it’s unpleasant doctrine of open borders for the world and his dog, and his Kalashnikov, to pass through?

    • Peter Den Haan

      I would not. EU borders are open only internally. Of course it’s also as a body trying to deal with a major refugee crisis right now, but that is principally governed by international treaty (the 1951 convention and 1967 protocol) rather than EU legislation as such.

      • Royinsouthwest

        Because the EU borders are open internally anyone who can get to Greece or Malta can as far as the Shetland Isles if they want to.

    • Manfarang

      The border between the Republic and NI was an open one during the Troubles.Closing it would have prevented nothing.

      • Dreadnaught

        Closing borders is different from controlling borders.

      • Inspector General

        You’re wrong there. Checks took place at the border. No one trafficking guns could count on getting through…

        • Manfarang

          That’s why the PIRA keep a stock of explosives in Sligo, is it?

    • michaelkx

      you do not think that you know who is going to keep his word?

  • Inspector General

    The other thing one might ask is is there anyone here who disagrees that the only worthwhile political party in the UK that would meet Islamic militancy head on is UKIP?
    That means restrictions on their activities here.

    We don’t want to be next months Paris, you know!

    • Manfarang

      UKIP migration spokesman Steven Woolfe has called for the West to do deal with Bashar al-Assad in order to bring peace to Syria.
      (A deal with Assad won’t bring peace)

      • dannybhoy

        Let’s not forget that before we started poking our noses in, Bashar al Assad was regarded as the legitimate ruler of Syria. No better no worse than other Islamic national dictators. By butting in we actually made things worse for the ordinary people of Syria -including Christians.
        If we had stayed out of it, that (sovereign) nation would have resolved it one way or another. We interfere but we can’t solve the problem. Only the Muslims can do that.

        • Dreadnaught

          We should never get involved in other peoples cultural wars unless it is a direct threat to ourselves.

        • By being shoulder to shoulder with the Yanks who drag us into all sorts of situations along with the French too. The greedy profit hungry Yanks are too tied up with the Saudi’s to be able to say no when needed to, and we are too close to the lot of them for comfort.
          Saudi’s want their oil pipeline through Syria so they can continue to dominate the oil market and of course the religious aspect comes into it too with Syria being mostly non Sunni, non Wahhabi and sworn enemies with the prospect of it’s own oil fields. It would help greatly if US stopped dropping arms to all these different factions who are anti Assad fighting in Syria as the weapons are finding their way to ISIS along with the people fighting in these factions who are not loyal they join the highest paying group, they are mercenaries only. The Free Syrian Army that the US trained and armed is so splintered now and a lot have joined IS as the pay is better.
          The Saudi’s have got to stop funding IS and the Turks have got to stop buying the illegal oil from them.

      • Dreadnaught

        I think he is wrong. Russia is now involved. If there is any deal to be done by us it is with them. The antagonism between Sunni, Shia, Alawite etc can only be settled by themselves; if at all.

      • Inspector General

        Assad seems a capable dictator. What do you want, the tyranny of democracy in Syria?

        • Manfarang

          Only a limited number of political parties have been allowed to operate in Syria, mainly leftist, so its hardly a democracy.

    • David

      Ukip wishes to promote our Judaeo-Christian heritage above all others. So to put it bluntly it favours all orthodox branches of the Christian faith. That is pretty much the opposite of what we’ve had from the establishment parties, who are desperate to impress the cultural leaders (traitors) that their parties too are moral and cultural relativists. That’s one of the many reasons that the establishment hates Ukip.
      I hope you enjoyed Nigel’s Gloucester pitch. On this tour he went all round us here, focussing on winnable seats, obviously.

  • Albert

    The heart of the political response is that politicians, like most people in the secular West don’t understand any religion any more. As such, they are completely hindered in responding to the religious elements of this crisis. Which, under the circumstances, is quite a blind spot.

    • Dreadnaught

      I understand enough about religion to know that Islam is at the root of the current thread.

      • Albert

        I never suggested you didn’t. What I was getting at was the way in which politicians will say Islam is nothing to do with this. There is no doubt that there are many, many Muslims who are as horrified as we are. But there were at least 8 Muslims last night who doubtless will have used Islam as justification for their evil acts. We need politicians to get on top of this.

        • Dreadnaught

          No. What you said was the secular West dos not understand religion any more. That is another thread altogether.

          • carl jacobs

            The Secular West does not understand religion. It is ideologically committed to the idea that religion is an accident to the substance of civilization. That’s why it doesn’t know how to respond to Islam.

          • Dreadnaught

            And who is the voice of the Secular West that has convinced you of this? You can’t make a statement like that with any authority – its just an observation biased by your own default position.

          • Anton

            Carl is spot on here.

          • Dreadnaught

            and your’e not biased at all are you – maybe you could explain how you, the CoE, RC Jews etc who live in the west or even the bible belt US, is not part of the ‘secular west’ Where is the borderline?
            Being secular means being tolerant of religion or none without preference.

          • carl jacobs

            Dreadnaught

            Europe is not secular in the same way I am secular. This isn’t about the place of religion in Gov’t. It’s about the place of religion in civilization. Those are two very different questions.

          • Dreadnaught

            Again you are offering only your opinion, based on what authority I just can’t see.

          • Anton

            So are you!

          • Dreadnaught

            I asked you a simple enough question, go on; take a shot.

          • Anton

            Didn’t understand it as phrased. Please rephrase and I shall.

          • carl jacobs

            So you think the secularism of the French Revolution and the Secularism of the American revolution are simply two different manifestations of the same concept?

          • Dreadnaught

            Right now I couldn’t care less.

          • Anton

            As far as I am concerned people are free to believe what they like. They are not free to DO as they like, however, if their scriptures tell them to kill others.

          • Dreadnaught

            Totally agree with you.

          • carl jacobs

            Well, you did, among others. You have forcefully advocated in the past that Islam should be dealt with as a political movement. That’s a convenient way to abstract it out of the privatized world of religion and into a realm you can comprehend.

            Secularists think that religion isn’t real. They think of it as a mask for other more tangible concerns. “It isn’t about truth. It’s about power!” Do you know how many times I have encountered variations on that argument and in how many different contexts? So a secularist is going to look for the material cause that is behind the transcendent claim. They don’t understand that you have to fight a transcendent claim with a transcendent claim. But Secularists have no transcendent claims other than the transcendent assertion that there are no transcendent truths. That’s why they are disarmed in the face of Islam.

            What is the actual Secularist response to Islamic terrorism? “Secularize them.” And if that doesn’t work? Then they don’t have a clue what to do.

          • Dreadnaught

            This secular man knows exactly what to do with Islam. You see the ‘They’ you talk about have to exist as a physical entity which ‘they’ dont.

          • carl jacobs

            What would you do with Islam, Dreadnaught?

          • Dreadnaught

            Right now I am more concerned with the security of my Country. In the future I would seek to have Islam excluded from Europe. How many Muslims have you or Christianity succeeded in converting to Christianity recently?

          • carl jacobs

            In the future I would seek to have Islam excluded from Europe.

            So your definition of Secularism …

            Being secular means being tolerant of religion or none without preference.

            … actually does have preference, then, doesn’t it. What you meant to say was …

            Being secular means being tolerant of religion or none without preference except for Islam.

            Now, here is where you say that Islam is a pernicious political ideology so that you can save that concept of Secularism you just stepped all over. And in so doing, you will give a clear example of what I have been saying.

          • Dreadnaught

            At this moment, when a religion that is rooted in a violent translates that to the reality of the day it looses its place for consideration to exist or be tolerated.

          • carl jacobs

            And you would apply that logic unsparingly. You would establish a class called “Muslim” and you would judge members of that class by the categories you assign to the class. No longer would there be individual guilt or innocence. There would be class guilt.

            And you would drive them out.

          • Dreadnaught

            You do realise that ‘class’ in the secular sense is nothing to do with it, Why introduce such a diversion? There seems to be little troubling the West at home, that stems directly for Shia or Alawite or any of the other variations of Islam. We are dealing directly with Sunni Wahabbism: that is until something else within Islam takes up the baton of dominance.

          • carl jacobs

            “Class” as in “Classification.” You are the one who said “In the future I would seek to have Islam excluded from Europe.” That is not a nuanced statement. That is a statement that is stunning in its generality. How do you suppose you are going to achieve that?

          • Dreadnaught

            I gave that recipe earlier today.

          • carl jacobs

            You mean this?

            Only when Muslims have proved themselves not to be the enemy should we consider easing off.

            Presume them guilty, and demand they prove their innocence?

          • Dreadnaught

            No not them. It.

          • carl jacobs

            There is no “it.” There is only “them.” As you wrote: “Only when Muslims have proved themselves…” If you had written “Only when Islam proves itself…” you would have written an incoherent statement. “Islam” can’t prove anything. Only people can prove things.

            The individual Muslim (say for example, one of those Muslims DanJ0 says he works with) is not necessarily guilty of anything. Why then would you make him prove his innocence?

          • Dreadnaught

            If the subject matter was indeed one individual Muslim your argument would make a little sense. As it stands, I can only assume you have a lot time on your hands to be engaging with such limp responses. I’m out.

          • Albert

            You mean the way the secularists of the French Terror dealt with Christianity?

          • bluedog

            Let me answer.

            In the first instance, Western leaders who have allowed the emergence of large Muslim populations within the West should admit the catastrophic mistake that this has been and continues to be. What you will now see is growing and overwhelming demand for an end to Muslim immigration as a first step. Then the unassailable logic will assert itself – if there were no Muslims there would be no problem. A badly frightened populace will demand and get repatriation of Muslims. ‘Migrants’ and ‘Asylum Seekers’ already conveniently in camps will find themselves being shipped out. Forget about the metaphysics of Islam, this is now in the realm of the tangible and the immediate.

            Read in Gatestone that so many of the almost exclusively young male Muslims entering Europe are financed by people smugglers in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Most travel on forged papers if they have papers at all. Read too that by next year there will be as many young Muslim males (5.5m) in Germany of military age as there are native German men of military age. Once you comprehend these facts, if true, the situation assumes a different dimension.

          • carl jacobs

            A badly frightened populace will demand and get repatriation of Muslims.

            The populace may demand repatriation, but it won’t get repatriation. There are to many Muslims. They have no place to go. There is no way for them to get there, even if there was a “there.” They wouldn’t roll over like sheep and allow themselves to de repatriated in any case. And finally, many of those Muslims are citizens.

            The logic of this situation is leading to race war. Because when you discover that all the morally tolerable options are unrealizable, race war is what will remain.

          • bluedog

            But the issue is not race, it’s religion.

          • carl jacobs

            You think people are going to make that distinction?

          • bluedog

            Yes. Any competent British political entrepreneur would form a pre-emptive coalition with other demographics. The blacks are notionally Christian and would be happy to join the winning side, the Hindus have experience with Islam and would be natural allies, thus helping to isolate the Muslims.

            ‘They have no place to go. There is no way for them to get “there”,’. Not so. We’ve had this discussion before. It is well within the military capability of Britain and France to take and hold a beach-head in North Africa and set up a shuttle service ferrying Muslims back there by air and sea. For example, Tunisia is both militarily weak and a transit point or source of many illegal immigrants. The flow could simply reverse.

            But looking at other aspects of the situation it is impossible to understate the risks to Europe of the Muslim migration. If the figures of Muslim males within Germany are right, 1% of 5.5 million yields 5,500 suicide bombers. We have just seen France brought to a halt by seven. Apart from internal risks, there are clear external risks given the Pakistani nuclear arsenal and Pakistan’s derogation of nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia. If Gatestone is correct in claiming that many of the Muslim male invaders are funded by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, the Saudis are not going to stand idly by while the flow is reversed. The migrant flow appears to be a strategic initiative of the Sunni Muslim states with the clear objective of crippling Europe.

            And then there is Turkey with a population of 71m Sunni Muslims. Yet Europe cannot survive the status-quo, nor can it survive an even greater percentage of its population becoming Muslim. The dilemma is acute and it is remarkable that we have yet to see a full assessment of the situation prepared by an EU or European national security agency. Hopefully a group of analysts is joining up the dots and reaching a conclusion based on facts rather than wishful thinking.

            In the context of the above, the call by the G20 for Syrian elections in 2017 appears quite delusional. Will ISIS be campaigning and for whom in the large tract of Syria they control? Who will staff the Syrian electoral commission to ensure that the ballot is properly conducted? ISIS? Hezbollah?

          • Albert

            I fear you may be right in terms of what people will demand. But Carl is right too that no Government will be able to repatriate all the Muslims (nor should they). My worry would be that, if things continue as they are, we will see a new holocaust, not of Jews, but of Muslims.

          • Carl, I found that helpful. Thank you.

          • Albert

            What you said was the secular West dos not understand religion any more.

            No, I said, as anyone can see I said, The heart of the political response is that politicians, like most people in the secular West don’t understand any religion any more.

            Having said that, I do think that the secular West doesn’t, on the whole, understand religion any more.

        • carl jacobs

          Hey! I want some props from you for the “Accidents/Substance” reference that I used below. I did that just for you.

    • Albert, most Christians don’t understand the implications of faith in God anymore. Substitute the word Christian for Catholic in this article:

      http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/11/radicati-editorial-what-god-wants-not.html#more

      • Albert

        Certainly, and that is the bitter fruit of secularism.

  • Royinsouthwest

    Although advocates of mass immigration did not carry out this atrocity they are responsible for admitting a substantial Fifth Column to France, Britain and other Western nations and therefore they have blood on their hands.

  • chiefofsinners

    We have the answer to Islam. It is called Christianity. A superior religion because it is the truth and Islam is a lie.
    Unfortunately our leaders will not believe it or proclaim it. Too offensive to the Muslims. Too restrictive for Western man who wants to decide his own morality and behave as he pleases.
    So they try instead to proclaim the towering values which arose out of Christianity. A building without foundations. A society on the verge of collapse.

    • William Lewis

      This

    • Anton

      The trouble is that, while Islam is political as well as religious, authentic Christianity leaves people free to believe or not – and what if many don’t?

      • chiefofsinners

        We are currently finding out the answer to that question. Last night is perhaps just the beginning of what happens when a society forsakes Christianity.

        • michaelkx

          I agree with this too

    • michaelkx

      well said sir

    • David

      Well put chief !

    • Jon Sorensen

      If we learned something from this it is that we need less religion and more reason and empathy. More religion will not solve this conflict…

      • William Lewis

        Yes, of course. Those poor suicide bombers just needed a bit of empathetic reasoning and all would have been sorted. Thank you Jon for expressing the blind, ignorant hubris of the secularist position so succinctly.

        • Jon Sorensen

          When you have too much religion empathetic reasoning does not seem to work. Religion seem to make people angry too, just like you there…

          • William Lewis

            If empathetic reasoning doesn’t work then we don’t need more of it, do we? You have just contradicted yourself and then attempted a speculative, diversionary ad hominem, all in four sentences. That’s pretty cute.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Why is it so difficult to understand that the solutions is less religion and more reason & empathy?

            First you use angry ad hominem at me, and when I call you angry you got your knickers twisted. I think we can call that a fail.

          • Ivan M

            Which just shows that in practical terms you fellows are useless. All your energy is spent baiting harmless Christians. You would be among the last persons I would expect to take the message of empathy and tolerance to the Muzzies. Your work is to stymie any Christian response no matter what.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Nice generalization! Surely ISIS will deliver a message of empathy and tolerance before I do…. #christiantruth

            All our energy? *harmless* Christians?..ok

            Here is a Charlie Hebdo cartoonist Joann Sfar frame to calm you down:
            https://instagram.com/p/-C-NNrHZXh/

          • Phil R

            They laugh at your reason and empathy Jon

            Reason and empathy killed these people.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Of course these deeply religious people laugh at my reason and empathy… doh!

          • Ivan M

            So now you are hot under the collar? The message that all religions are responsible for the current violence is a constant trope with you fellows. It is shopworn and irritating which is why you fellows are happy about it, like the joker playing Imagine outside that music hall. A bloody joke. The bodies are not even cold yet and you start bullshitng the Christians.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Myopic Christians are marketing and selling their faith while religiously inspired bullets are still flying. When you get pushback from Joann Sfar and people like me, you get a temper tantrum and manufacture outrage of “bodies are not even cold yet”. How about you stop your pushing first?

          • Ivan M

            All right read “It has not even been minutes yet” in place of “bodies are not even cold yet”.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Christians pushed their agenda while the hostage situation was happening and *before* the last person was killed. Note that pushback from Joann Sfar came *after* Christians started to sell their faith…

          • William Lewis

            You can call it what you like, Jon, but it just ain’t so.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Some people never get reason & empathy I guess…

      • Albert

        Mmmm…let’s not forget: the greatest act of religious terror in the history of France was not committed on Friday night. Nor was it committed by Muslims or Christians or people of any religion.

        • Jon Sorensen

          Only if you ignore the acts of religious people then the greatest act of religious terror was done by non-religious people.

          • Albert

            You’ve obviously never heard of the Terror following the French Revolution.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Like I said. You need to have a religious mind if you think 40.000 deaths in history of France ruled by Christians for 1500 years is the the greatest act of religious terror.

          • Albert

            Sorry, the figure given by Michael Burliehg, who is a foremost authority on religious violence (better than Wikipedia) is 250 000 Catholics killed in Western France alone. But even if we go with your lower figure of 40 000 I’d like to know which single religious act killed more.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Read Richard S. Dunn “The Age of Religious Wars, 1559-1715” and read about how they got colonies and [tried to] Christianized those.

          • Albert

            Perhaps my wording was not clear – I was meaning acts in Europe. I haven’t read that book, but what are the figures?

            The key thing though is your original claim:

            If we learned something from this it is that we need less religion and more reason and empathy.

            The point being that the first attempt consciously to do that, resulted in unprecedented violence and death where it was tried.

            As far as I can see, violence is not caused by religion or atheism. It is caused by human beings. Religion can sometimes add fuel to the fire, but compared with atheism, it can also act like a break. As Roger Scruton puts it:

            Take religion away, as the Nazis and the Communists did, and you do nothing to suppress the pursuit of Lebensraum. You simply remove the principal source of mercy in the ordinary human heart and so make war pitiless; atheism found its proof at Stalingrad.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “The point being that the first attempt consciously to do that, resulted in unprecedented violence and death where it was tried.”
            This is wrong on so many levels. Reason and empathy was not used for “unprecedented violence and death”. You seem to have difficulties to understand this, *and* this coming from a supporter of Christianity which on its first attempt to use power was tyranny, persecution of non-Christians and decline of society for millenia.

            “As far as I can see, violence is not caused by religion”
            You really need to read news. Just Google “Paris” or “Crusades” and see what you can find out.

            “but compared with atheism, it can also act like a break.”
            Typical Christian mistake. Not believing in something (God, unicorns, Santa Claus etc) does not get people to act.

            Roger Scruton has never read the Bible or read about WWII. If he had read he would know religion offers no mercy for non-believer, but they are to be torture forever. Mercy is not a central idea of religions, but belief and salvation.

            If Scruton would have read history he would know that Hitler was a Christian and his army was a Christian army supported by Churches. Hitler persecuted Jews, atheists and gays, who are all still second class citizens in many western countries. Hitler’s Christian army was defeated in Stalingrad but communists troops while also fighting capitalist troops elsewhere. What an ignorant quote from Scruton.

          • Albert

            You seem to have difficulties to understand this,

            No. You don’t seem to get that if you get rid of religion, you aren’t then left with reason and empathy.

            *and* this coming from a supporter of Christianity which on its first attempt to use power was tyranny, persecution of non-Christians and decline of society for millenia.

            There is an enormous difference between the eras. The Church came into a world of ignorance, in which there was no such thing as human rights or even any claim about human beings on which such rights could be based. But secularists, even though they come later, after clearer political ideas are available, nevertheless, completely punch above their weight when it comes to violence.

            You really need to read news. Just Google “Paris” or “Crusades” and see what you can find out.

            I think you grossly over-simplify what is going on.

            Typical Christian mistake. Not believing in something (God, unicorns, Santa Claus etc) does not get people to act.

            Typical atheist mistake, you don’t answer the argument made, but answer the argument you think has been made. I never said, in fact, if anything I said the opposite, atheism causes people to act. I said it does not act as a break on human aggression.

            Roger Scruton has never read the Bible or read about WWII.

            Jon Sorenson has never read Roger Scruton, but comments anyway.

            If Scruton would have read history he would know that Hitler was a Christian and his army was a Christian army supported by Churches.

            If you really believe that, you are astonishingly ignorant and gullible. Did you not know that Hitler even had a wing of Dachau especially for the clergy. Let’s just say, they weren’t there for singing the Horst-Wessel-Lied with too much gusto.

            What are your sources?

          • Jon Sorensen

            Reality does not support your claim “if you get rid of religion, you aren’t then left with reason and empathy”. We can see from Scandinavia that when religion reduces, reason and empathy has increases.

            “There is an enormous difference between the eras.”
            Exactly! Christianity did not bring goodness or human right. We have to look elsewhere to find out where the progress came from.

            “But secularists, even though they come later, after clearer political ideas are available, nevertheless, completely punch above their weight when it comes to violence.”
            LOL. Such ignorance. Secular countries are safer, healthier and better to live in that Christians ever archived in 1500 years of power. Christian nation seem to warmongering all the time.

            “I think you grossly over-simplify what is going on.”
            Because your complete nonsense of “violence is not caused by religion” when holy books demand violence. But you still don’t get it even when it is over-simplified to you.

            “Typical atheist mistake, you don’t answer the argument made”
            I didn’t answer because I don’t agree with your premises. Do you still beat up your wife?
            Atheism does not increase or decrease “human aggression”. It is an answer to one question. Atheism is the only way to ground your thinking in reality and the best way for you to become more ethical and better person. It does not guarantee it but it seems to be a requirement for a Christians to become a better person.

            “Jon Sorenson has never read Roger Scruton, but comments anyway.”
            I read and responded Roger Scruton’s quote you provided. You comment my comments and have not read my book. Christian logic; provides a quote, but gets upset when some comments that.

            “What are your sources [of Hitler’s Christianity]?”
            In Mein Kampf he refers to God more than hundred times and explains his faith. Hitler was pretty much like a warlord just like Moses, except Christian hero Moses managed to do more genocides. Is your view that Hitler had to fake his Christianity to get to power? What would that view tell you about Christianity? Did German’s think that Christianity is required to be an evil dictator?

            “Did you not know that Hitler even had a wing of Dachau especially for the clergy.”
            I’ve been to Dachau as my family has personal connection to Hitler’s aggression but didn’t see that wing. What I saw was a Christian nation with loooong history, including Luther, persecuting Jews, gays and atheists. And according to Christians Dachau is only the start for Jews and atheists, God will continue to torture them more forever. You should also go to Dachau to see where Christianity leads to.

          • Albert

            I don’t have time to read all this, but your first point stands out as setting the tone:

            We can see from Scandinavia that when religion reduces, reason and empathy has increases.

            You seem to want to draw a universal conclusion from one example. That’s irrational. It’s also falsified. In many parts of the world, the opposite happened. Therefore, the loss of religion was not likely to be the reason for the growth in empathy and reason in Scandinavia.

            You comment my comments and have not read my book. Christian logic; provides a quote, but gets upset when some comments that.

            No. I never said your book was wrong. I said I hadn’t read it and asked for details. You on the other hand simply responded to my quote with statement of fact that wasn’t true. To suggest we are doing the same thing is irrational.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “You seem to want to draw a universal conclusion from one example”
            This might surprise you but there are three countries in Scandinavia. You can also look other countries Finland, Iceland, Estonia, Belgium, the Netherlands….

            “In many parts of the world, the opposite happened.”
            So why don’t your name a country where magic/religious beliefs have decreased, and reason and empathy has also decreased?

            “Therefore, the loss of religion was not likely to be the reason for the growth in empathy and reason in Scandinavia.”
            So what is the “likely” reason then? Nice try to speculate a problem away…

            “You on the other hand simply responded to my quote with statement of fact that wasn’t true.
            Anyone who claims that Nazis took “religion away” has no idea about Nazis. And concluding “atheism found its proof at Stalingrad” makes no sense considering “Gott mit uns” army was defeated there. Honesty is a difficult thing for some.

          • Albert

            This might surprise you but there are three countries in Scandinavia.

            Thank you – I did know that, but it does not falsify the point. You lumped them together for a reason.

            So why don’t your name a country where magic/religious beliefs have decreased, and reason and empathy has also decreased?

            Revolutionary France, the Soviet Union, Communist China, Europe generally in the 20th Century. Those sorts of places.

            So what is the “likely” reason then? Nice try to speculate a problem away…

            I don’t know enough about Scandinavian history to answer that, but I don’t need to: loss of religion is manifestly not the magic bullet you think it is.

            Anyone who claims that Nazis took “religion away” has no idea about Nazis. And concluding “atheism found its proof at Stalingrad” makes no sense considering “Gott mit uns” army was defeated there. Honesty is a difficult thing for some.

            You’ve already compromised yourself on this one. Reading about the history of the Church Hitler’s Europe shows the point is entirely different from that which you hold. Hitler clearly planned to destroy the Churches and marginalised and persecuted them. Politicians use mottos, not to show what they are doing, but to hide what they are doing. Look at countries which use the word “democratic” in their titles. They don’t tend to be democratic. The Nazis were masters of propaganda and lies. So good that it seems some are still taken in by them.

  • that requires some unpalatable truths to be told by a few prophets, and we don’t like to listen to prophets because they tell unpalatable truths

    Supporters of mass Third World immigration—the mainstream political parties, the churches, the media—have always regarded Prophet Enoch Powell and Prophet Nick Griffin as ghastly pieces of filth (Cameron’s description of Griffin) to be shunned and silenced, but a few of us native British find their truths far from unpalatable: the truth that diversity of race and religion weakens a nation and the truth that Islam can never be compatible with Western civilization.

    Time will tell how many more atrocities and how much more suffering it will take for Prophets Enoch and Nick to be honoured in their own country and for the lies of state, church and media to be exposed.

    • carl jacobs

      Would that be NIck “Holocaust? What Holocaust?” Griffin?

    • Anton

      Griffin is tainted by antisemitism; let us look for people of greater stature who said the things you mention, of whom Enoch Powell was certainly one. I was at a private event addressed by him in the 1990s.

      • @ Anton—When Jews know for certain that their worst enemy in the world is Christianity, anti-Semitism is not a taint but a survival strategy. The moment you submit to boo words like anti-Semitic and racist, you are fighting the enemy on his terms. Good luck with that.

        • Anton

          Which Jews? The ones I know (who fought for the IDF in the early 1980s and now live in London) think that Islam is.

          • @ Anton—If Jews see Islam as a worse enemy than Christianity, why have they campaigned, with total success, for the (formerly) white Christian nations where they live to be opened up to Muslim immigration? Lawrence Auster answers my question: ‘there is something that many American Jews fear in their heart of hearts even more than they fear Moslem anti-Semitism, and that is white Christian anti-Semitism.’ To Jews, anything is better than Christianity.

          • Anton

            As I said, WHICH Jews? not the ones I know in London. Not the ones in Israel who guard the border from Muslim terror. Not the diplomats who write that Christian Zionists are the best friends they have nowadays.

            Some Jews think the way you say. But the Jews are not homogeneous in belief.

          • Inspector General

            What’s your opinion of ‘Britain First’, JR. For the benefit of readers here, it’s a fairly new movement formed by ex members of the BNP. And NO anti-Semitism.

            The opinion of Jewish types here would also be appreciated.

          • @ IG—I don’t know enough about Britain First to offer an opinion but alternatives to the anti-British LibLabCon are to be welcomed.

  • Pubcrawler

    The Times of Israel observes that the Bataclan Theatre is Jewish-owned and has long been a target of anti-Zionist protest. Which is just a coincidence, obviously.

  • IanCad

    Well; I’m afraid this savagery won’t be enough for some. Certainly not for Anita Arnand and those of her stripe on the BBC. Neither, I’m afraid, for those others who are so politically correct that any solution containing a smidgen of extra attention to our fellow Muslim subjects, is rejected out of hand.
    No; It will take a bigger and better show than that of last night.
    When it comes, and the West gets mad enough, it will end in a hurry.
    Islam is weak. It appears strong to the fearful. When the gloves come off the solution will be nasty, brutish, and short.

    • David

      I sense that attitudes are hardening now against internal traitors.

      • IanCad

        They’re already hardening towards Angela Merkel.
        Surely she must be on the way out?

        • Pubcrawler

          Meanwhile, in Sweden

          • IanCad

            Oh Dear!!
            Things could change very quickly.

  • Boris for PM and Nigel for deputy PM!

    • dannybhoy

      There is no doubting Nigel Farage’s appeal. Unfortunately the problem for me is that he remains largely a one man band, seemingly unable to build a cohesive leadership

      • James60498 .

        Whilst Boris paid for his mistress’ abortion and banned adverts about the fact that some former gays have been helped to recover.

        No thanks.

        • chiefofsinners

          Hear, hear. The man can’t control his hair or his trousers. How could he run a country?

        • Inspector General

          James. One looks to a new time ahead when a man who procures an abortion is hauled before the courts and sent down…

      • Inspector General

        Danny, we should rejoice that Farage’s inner circle are conviction politicians and not ‘personalities’. Just be thankful Kilroy Silk isn’t one of them.

        • dannybhoy

          This is true, but it is concerning that Nigel does not appear often with members of his inner circle. You have to build an essential leadership structure that sings from the same hymn sheet when it counts.

      • David

        Not true. Paul Nuttall is an accomplished stump politician with a good earthy, rooted common sense approach. Suzanne Evans is another clear thinking, hard hitting debater and realist. I could go on….

    • Inspector General

      Marie, the Inspector will never, ever see the attraction so evident among many that aforementioned Conservative buffoon apparently generates…

      • He’s good at keeping people at bay,like the lefties now and he would work very well with Mr Farage and UKIP. He has a good knowledge of history not the humanities tripe that people have been taught since the late 90’s, and he’s got vision.

        • CliveM

          He also wants Turkey to be allowed to join the EU.

          • Inspector General

            It’s the Tower for him then…

          • Does he really? Or was he just going along with what Dave wants?
            Boris knows all about the Ottoman Empire and Turkey, I would think he knows their temperament too. Only a fool would want Turkey to join the EU. Even if we leave, it’s in our interests and that of the EU that Turkey does not join.

          • CliveM

            He did a nice documentary about it. On Channel 4 I think. Basically he seemed to be saying we would be privileged to have them.

            Understandable with his background.

    • David

      Save us from that cynical, shallow buffoon Boris. I wouldn’t trust him with a kiddie’s chocolate egg.

  • Martin

    I see Jeremy Corbyn has tweeted

    “The horrific events in Paris were an attack on all multicultural & multi-faith societies. Solidarity to all affected ”

    Politically correct all the way.

    What is not politically correct is that this evil, like every evil of Man, will work out for the glory of God

  • bluedog

    Your Grace, one of the inconvenient truths never subject to comment in the West is the sociological underpinnings of the rise of China and the other leading nations of East Asia such as Japan and Korea. Without exception these nations are mono-ethnic, mono-cultural and consequently possessed of remarkable social cohesion.

    The Western obsession with diversity and the mistaken belief that all those of different faiths and cultural traditions will gratefully and seamlessly blend into our Judeo-Christian societies is leading us to anarchy, and inevitably, poverty. We already pay untold billions as the secret police try to keep track of potential mass-killers within our society. Now as we see in France, the economy is being very severely disrupted by the Islamic terror. A sociological and economic downward spiral in Europe has begun.

    Of course, the answer to this Manichean trend from the political elites will be yet more Manicheanism. Only full Manicheanism is permissible under the tenets of post-modern secularism.

    • Royinsouthwest

      China is not mono-ethnic. The Han are by far the largest element in the population and they are the people we think of as “Chinese” but there are various minorities who never get any attention in the West, apart from the people of Tibet and Xingiang.

      Japan also has an indigenous minority, the Ainu. However you are right to point out that China, Japan and Korea have very few immigrants. The ethnic minorities there are native to their respective countries.

    • Andre´Kristian

      Valued commenter, please permit a sincere adherent to Your upright opinions to forward his earnest compliments before such a clearsighted and stalwart political talent. Your declaration regarding the preposterous migrant flow, is none less than brilliant,sir! The consequences of this abominable voluntariness to surrender Europe to the fiendish foe, will be the fatal and disastrous end of the continent as we know it. The idea of eugenics suddenly appears to be quite amiable. As a grandfather, I cannot but shudder at the thought of the children´s future. What kind of countries will Sweden and my beloved UK turn out to be? Will they be able to protect themselves from the repugnant invaders that our disorderly and deluded politicians so willingly have opened up our gates and boarders to? I regard them as traitors, my esteemed writer. I also ponder upon what the deuce my own grandfather would have thought of these distorted and warped political ventures, a High Church gentleman as he was…
      Yours respectfully, Andreas.

  • The Explorer

    The 2005 London bombings were, in part at least, a punishment for UK involvement in the Iraq War. That gave them a comprehensibility. The events of 2007 (Glasgow Airport, failed car bomb outside London nightclub) were more abstract: the target was ‘slag culture’. You could stop involvement in Iraq. But slag culture?

    The Paris attacks of January 2015 had understandable targets: in Islamic terms, Jews and Charlie Hebdo both made sense. The motives for yesterday’s attack are more difficult to fathom. Given the diversity of targets one assumes it is another assault on slag culture in all its manifestations: as a prelude to bringing it down in due course.

    • CliveM

      I thought IS had claimed responsibility and said it was in revenge for taking part in the Syrian air strikes?

      • The Explorer

        Thank you. I’m obviously not up to date on my info. If it’s reprisal, the targets are still significant. Hitting an air force base would make sense. Hitting restaurants, rock concert etc suggests that there is no distinction drawn between military and civilian personnel. All non-Muslims may be targeted as enemy soldiers.

        • Pubcrawler
          • CliveM

            PC interesting. It does also support Explorers suggestion of an attack on the ‘slag culture’.

          • Pubcrawler

            As they’re being somewhat hammered in their heartland, they need a big PR coup to boost morale and maintain momentum. What better than a spectacular slaughter of a load of soft targets being un-Islamic in the heart of the great ‘crusader’ state?

          • CliveM

            Yes in reality it’s been a bad week for them, but the majority of the world won’t have noticed. Last night was a good diversion.

          • Old Nick

            Slag culture is equated with Christianity in some Near Eastern minds. I have lost count of the number of unfunny jokes I have heard in the Levant about Christians being perpetually drunk.

          • The Explorer

            The term “Christian whores” is used without any apparent sense of irony.

          • The Explorer

            “The lead carrier of the cross in Europe – Paris”. Paris? Really?

            I am reminded of a review I read of Philip Pullman’s trilogy, and the tireless and conscientious malevolence of the Authority: “if only the real Church were a quarter as dedicated as the one presented here”.

        • CliveM

          It makes sense when you consider the political and social impact. If they had attacked an airforce based it would have seemed more rational in European eyes, but in the eyes of IS it would have achieved so much less. At the moment in France everyone feels like a target and a lot of people are frightened. The psychological impact of yesterday will be felt for years.

          In IS terms yesterday was completely rational and successful.

          • Anna

            The enemy will fight to win by any means, to cause havoc and destroy morale, and they are never going to fight by your rules.

            Western leaders getting involved in conflicts abroad are unprepared for the wars to spread to their own shores; and do little to prevent or prepare for such eventuality. To attack Syria and simultaneously ‘open doors’ to Muslim migrants was the ultimate piece of madness.

            The French public, lulled by the long détente since WWII and conditioned to view an easy lifestyle as their birth-right, are
            poorly equipped to handle war on their own territory; and at the moment there seems no escape.

            We can only pray earnestly that France will return to her Christian roots and not fall into Muslim hands.

        • sarky

          Its called terrorism for a reason. Multiple ‘soft’ targets cause the most disruption and cause the most fear. If they hit a military base, people would still go to work and go out in the evenings. This way the maximum disruption is caused and fear is spread far from the actual target. You tell me one person in any european major city who won’t now be fearful going about their business.

          • The Explorer

            Good point. And so reprisal is just the excuse, not the real motive.

          • sarky

            Just look back to the troubles in Ireland, it was about furtherance of a cause through fear and terror. ISIL want to establish a caliphate and a fearful population plays into their hands.

          • And France with Paris being so open liberal and secular is vulnerable and ideal for a caliphate. In fact Europe with its stupid open borders policy and Merkel with her come on in all are welcome has stoked up trouble. Time for her to go.

          • The Explorer

            Not just A Caliphate. THE Caliphate. The one that marks the end of things.

          • Dreadnaught

            Keep Calm and Carry On is what was said to our parents and grandparents. It made sense then and it it makes sense now.
            ISIS is losing ground now for the first time as the air attacks have been more effective. Its a sign of their desperation that they are attacking Europeans at home and abroad.

          • CliveM

            It would be worrying therefore if western nation pulled out of the air strikes.

          • Dreadnaught

            You mean like the Saudis and Omanis.

    • I think it’s an assault on Western culture and cultures other than Islam,even the Cambodian restaurant. Cambodia is mainly Buddhist and other spiritual.

      • The Explorer

        Thank you. Yes, the Cambodian restaurant makes sense as a target: especially since Muslims in Burma feel under threat from Buddhists .

        • Ivan M

          There is no telling the logic of the half-educated Islamic mind, Your theory is as good as any. As in targeting the crusader of the cross, by killing heavy metal fans.

          • The Explorer

            Also an Italian restaurant, and a French restaurant run by integrated North Africans. It’s an attack on multicultural diversity which is contrary to the uniformity Islam would like to impose.

          • Ivan M

            It is possible that the murderers may have worked as kitchen help or ushers in these places.

          • The Explorer

            Very true. All speculation is tentative.

    • dannybhoy

      I think there are two aspects to this. One is that we shouldn’t allow an enemy’s ability to launch internal terror attacks on our people to dictate our foreign policy.
      The second is that we should really think through our foreign policy vis a vis Islam, so that whatever happens we as a nation can unite behind it.

      • The Explorer

        I was thinking of the difference between short-term and long-term objectives from an Islamic perspective.

        Iraq War the objective. Iraq War over. Fine. Objective achieved; terror attacks can cease.

        But if the objective is to bring down slag culture, that’s different. The West is incapable of bringing slag culture to an end because it has allowed it to flourish. Only sharia law – slogan: “No drugs, no gays, no slags” – can do this. But before sharia law can be implemented, the West must be taken down. So terror attacks continue until the West surrenders and virtue can be implemented.

        I’m not saying I think this is realistic. I’m just saying I think it may be the programme.

        • dannybhoy

          You’re so deep….!!
          It seems to me that there is no morally pure Islam. I think Islam seeks purity but can only achieve a semblance of it, an outward acquiesence through the threat of spiritual or physical punishment.
          Which results in a life lived in fear, oppression, repression and inner anger.
          Christianity also believes in purity, it emphasises the holiness of God and our inability to live a life pleasing to Him without acknowledging our rebellion and weakness.
          Once the individual is convicted of sin, and accepts God’s forgiveness and renewal through Jesus Christ, God’s Holy Spirit indwells the believer and begins a redemptive work from within.
          So the transformation is based on a relationship with God through Christ rather, than a rule book.
          Islam is sterile because the only surefire way to achieve Paradise is by dying a martyr for the faith by killing the infidel.
          So the only sure way to gain Paradise is to kill people who aren’t Muslim and won’t convert.

  • maigemu

    One thought springs to mind. Are we thankful that our security forces have been much more efficient than those of France?

    • Royinsouthwest

      I am not certain that our security forces are more efficient than those of France. Perhaps they are but it could be that we have simply been lucky so far. Another possible explanation is that France might have a larger 5th Column of terrorist sympathisers than Britain does.

      • sarky

        We are an island. Makes it near impossible to move across our border without the possibility of stop/search. Latest news seems to indicate that weapons/people came from Belgium.

      • maigemu

        Admitted France has more Muslims to police but since 7/7 only one attack has succeeded in UK, the one murdering Lee Rigby. 

      • They have a much larger 5th Column because of the dangerous EU open border scheme they have been practicing, and their liberal laissez-faire socialist ways.

        • David

          True.

      • dannybhoy

        France has much longer and more porous borders, and is closer to Africa.
        Looking back it is no real wonder that Germany so easily invaded France. Also like us she had a colonial past and a large immigrant population. I don’t think we should judge her too harshly.

      • maigemu

        Both countries have let in millions of  foxes and now ask why so many chickens are dead. Of course it could never spring from the beliefs of foxes could it? That would be terrible foxophobic.

    • David

      France has many more Muslims, who are even more segregated than here. The general level of Muslim antipathy towards the indigenous French is far higher, or more manifest, than to us. For example, car thefts and burnings have been commonplace in Paris for a decade.

  • Inspector General

    The Inspector has changed his mind over the Burkha. Although he still considers the right to dress as you will a fundamental freedom, the banning of this attire may encourage the more devout of muslims to leave the UK and live elsewhere.

    One is rather disappointed it has come to this, but needs must, what!

    • dannybhoy

      I wouldn’t be disappointed.
      In an open democratic society it is impossible to function properly if a section of society are covered up and making a real statement of difference by their garb.
      Why do you think Kemal Attaturk in modernising Turkey, insisted on the population wearing western clothing, and writing in Latin rather than Arabic script?
      Appearance is important. You want to be a fully paid up, covered up, Shari’a compliant Muslim, then you’re probably in the wrong country.

      • Inspector General

        We need a human equivalent of the Dangerous Dogs Act. Not just to control what we have, but to discourage others from coming here, although a blanket ban on immigration from Islamic countries would be better. Whatever skills they possess, even medical, when weighed against the potential threat that they be, any advantage of them being here is negated. Besides, these third world countries need to retain their talent, not export it to us.

        • Old Nick

          What about the Syriac Christians ?

  • grandpa1940

    “Cameron orders ‘shoot to kill’ if we are attacked'”

    Now I can understand the imperative: ‘We must be seen to be strong, to do something; we must show we are willing to kill!’; but the query must and should be posed; ‘Why are politicians keen to have the rifles and Heckler&Koch carbines fired now, and why not when the IRA was busy killing British soldiers on the streets of Belfast, when IRA/SinnFein were planning the murders of British subjects whose only crime was that they worshipped a different form of a Christian God? ‘

    Just think of that last sentence, if you will. The alleged Catholic leaders of a Catholic terrorist army planned to mutilate, maim and kill Church of England Protestants because they were simply Protestants, and Loyalists. Sounds just like the Muslim Ideal to me!

    My brother served, as an ordinary Army squaddie, on the streets, cess-pits and shit-holes which formed the majority of the Catholic areas of Belfast. His friend were shot in front of him, his mate was killed as he walked behind my brother; but, before a single round was fired in reply to the murderous sniper fire, a yellow card had to be shown, a DISCUSSION was imperative with higher ranked officers, safe and snug behind their barbed wire and concrete walls in their fortified base areas, and THEN a warning shot had to be fired OVER THE TARGET AREA.

    I do so hope that when a British rifle is aimed at one of these MUSLIM scum, the holder has the simple guts to aim for ‘full body mass’, as I was taught to do; so as to ensure that the bastard goes down; and STAYS DOWN!

    • Ivan M

      Why was your brother slow in responding to the sniper fire? The reaction should have been immediate.

      • carl jacobs

        It’s called “Military discipline.”

        • Ivan M

          His buddy crumpled in front of him. Military discipline requires that fire be returned. I doubt if there is any ROE anywhere in the world that requires checking with officers behind barbed wires and certainly not firing over the heads in these circumstances.

          If it is any comfort grandad shoot to kill is the operating norm. Check with a Brazilian electrician circa 2005.

          • carl jacobs

            Do you remember when I told you that you were clueless about the military?

            I doubt if there is any ROE…

            But that’s exactly what he said. They weren’t allowed to return fire without authorization.

          • Ivan M

            Can you please spare me your military experience bs. What I said is the norm as it conforms with all that is known about human nature. I asked a specific question of grandad. If he corrects me I’ll slink off.

          • carl jacobs

            Can you please spare me your military experience bs.

            Can you stop making dumb statements about military service? Your post implicitly and thoughtlessly accused a soldier of behaving dishonorably when in fact he behaved honorably. I have no idea if grandpa1940 will respond. I wasn’t going to let that accusation stand unchallenged.

          • Ivan M

            What is so honourable about waiting for clearance before firing in such a situation? I call it bs.

          • carl jacobs

            Where did this begin?

            He exhibited the military discipline expected of a professional soldier, obeyed his ROE – which btw count as a direct order – and thus put the success of his mission before his own personal emotions. The ROE aren’t random. They serve a purpose.

          • Ivan M

            As I said if grandad swats me down I’ll slink away, as the dishonourable should. No court martial in the world, and certainly not the British Army of that, or any other era would have convicted his brother beyond if at all a perfunctory swat. The story did not pass the smell test, that is why I called it.

    • Inspector General

      Grandad – One does not wish to be disrespectful, but as you are probably a retired fellow, you might have the time and the want to bone up on the marvellous qausi police state that was the north of Ireland around the time the civil rights protests took place in the 1960s, and onwards from there. Now, you will need to be disciplined and take into account the full facts, and not just the ones convenient for a biased view. But, then, for an ex soldier as you seem to be, discipline will not be a problem. Will it?

      • grandpa1940

        IG,

        One presumes, from the sense of your discourse, that you prefer the World view as proposed and pushed by SinnFeinIRA. As I tend to live in the real world, I tend to see reality, with murderers and apologists in Power in Stormont, with the IRA thugs (a.k.a. SiinFein Community activists) pulling down Disability Living allowance, Tax credits, and for all I know, maternity benefits!

        • Inspector General

          Sinn Fein are a party of Marxist dreamers. The IRA, what’s left of it in the north, are criminal gangsters, many of whom deserve to be hanged.

          The point being made is to understand why people joined these things in the first place. And there’s more to understand. What made the rank and file, and no doubt some NCOs of the 1st battalion, Parachute regiment, conspire between them to use the Catholics of Derry for live target practice on 30th January 1972.

          Understanding it all is what it is all about. One cannot remember who said “Whoever understands the why and wherefore of his enemy, has the advantage over him”, but he’s bang on the money…

    • ” … the streets, cess-pits and shit-holes which formed the majority of the Catholic areas of Belfast.”

      In a few words, you have identified the reason why the civil rights movement started in Belfast. Do you suppose Catholics were less civilised than their Protestant neighbours? No. Catholics were denied employment, housing and the vote by the Christian Protestants of the North, and denied justice by a hostile governance system, police and criminal justice system. The IRA took advantage of these injustices, as terrorists do.

      Think on that and reflect on the causes of the murderous death and killings perpetrated by both sides.

      • dannybhoy

        I’d pretty much go along with that.

        • Inspector General

          Danny. Google ‘Burntollet Bridge incident’ on Wiki

          You’ve probably never heard about it. Few have. But if you want to see how murderous low level civil wars start, there’s your man, amongst other happenings…

          • dannybhoy

            Thanks, just read it.
            The other thing I would say (having had extensive and exhausting experience of discussing the issues on another blog), is that for some reason the folks most involved seem utterly incapable of letting go of the past.

          • Inspector General

            That’s easily explained, old chap. Whatever side you were on, it was your heritage. No escaping it…

          • dannybhoy

            I’m very pleased to say that I have met some lovely Christian people from Northern Ireland who have escaped it…
            For Goodness sake, let’s not go down that sectarian road here on Archbishop Cranmer’s bog.
            Ooops! I meant blog….

          • Inspector General

            Here’s an example of ‘no escaping it’. Man walks into a police station. “Good morning, I’m a fellow of good character and I’d like to become a special constable.” “Certainly sir, and your address please. The man gives an address which is in a Catholic area. “Right, we have no vacancies now, but if any come up, we’ll write to you.

            Afterwards, another man walks in and asks the same, giving a protestant address. “Take this slip and go to the stores. You’ll be issued with a uniform there”.

            Now, add to that going for a job, etc, and there you have it. No escaping it…

          • dannybhoy

            Yes yes yes,,
            I’ve heard so many examples and I don’t deny they’re true, but my argument always was “How does what the Provos did -even to their own people- show their moral superiority to the Prods??
            And then you start sinking into the “Whataboutery Swamps….”

          • Inspector General

            Well, we started off trying to understand what happened and why. But we’re far removed from it in Great Britain. The way things were surely couldn’t happen in part of the UK, could it?
            You see the problem, don’t you. It was all so damn ‘un-English’, shall we say. A different continent altogether….

          • But do remember, Inspector, Catholics were members of the “Beast” and “Anti-Christ” and subject to control by the Vatican. They had to be kept in their place – in ” … the cess-pits and shit-holes”, lest they corrupted the land.

          • Inspector General

            Makes you wonder if Goebbels ever went to the North.

          • dannybhoy

            That’s the weirdest thing. I have a near neighbour and he and his wife hail from south of the border. Lovely people.
            So again my argument was how come when the Northern Irish leave Northern Ireland they become loved and valued members of their (mainland) communities?
            It’s the pressure of tight knit traditional communities with unhealthily long memories…

          • dannybhoy

            Consider the English Civil War Inspector..

          • Inspector General

            Yes, almost. But there, brother was split from brother….

          • dannybhoy

            My point exactly. The English Civil War split families and destroyed friendships, divided communities etc etc.
            But was there any long term hatred, whataboutery, and reprisals?
            No.
            We got over it and moved on.

          • CliveM

            Both sides have their resentments and tales Inspector. My Great Grandfather was chased out of Dublin at partition. He had no military background, simply worked for the Post Office.

            The suspicion is ‘someone’ wanted the house.

            Its all history now.

          • Inspector General

            A lot of that happened, Clive. To think that all the Irish wanted was a devolved parliament in Dublin, as the Scots have today, yet those uncompromising Orange bastards in the north wrecked everything

          • Anton

            It goes back to the fact that Ulster was “planted” early in the 17th century, after Ireland had been conquered by King Henry VIII and his progeny, by presbyterians from Scotland, whereas the rest of Ireland was planted by episcopalians from England. By “planted” I mean that the best land was forcibly appropriated for settlers. The presbyterians and their descendants were far more sharply antagonistic to Catholicism than episcopalians. This demonstrates that belief is stronger than blood, for the Scots and the Irish are ethnically far more closely related to each other than to the English (who are largely Anglo-Saxon invaders).

          • Inspector General

            Rather more prosaic than that. The English army officers stationed in Ireland threatened to resign their commissions en masse in home rule went ahead.

          • Anton

            History is the key to (almost) everything in the affairs of men. To look deep, look far.

          • Inspector General

            When the Lord Lieutenant was presented with this ultimatum, he should have issued the following….

            “Any man who resigns his commission, without written authority to do so, and that will only be forthcoming in exceptional circumstances, will find himself on trial for his life. The charge being treachery”

            It did not happen…

          • Anton

            I disagree. I do not approve of the Officers’ threat, but it is a higher good that Officers be allowed to resign their Commission at any time except when commanding troops in the face of the enemy. Remember, they are not permitted to disobey orders.

          • Inspector General

            Well done Anton! With an attitude like yours, the south of Ireland was surely lost…

          • Anton

            Why was there already the need for the army to be in there? It goes back another 300 years.

          • Inspector General

            The army had been in Ireland in numbers a long time. Good cavalry training there, don’t you know….

          • CliveM

            There was a lot of stupidity. Typically my family were non political (a strain amongst Bretherins). A lot could have been avoided.

          • This may astound, amuse or confuse you, Inspector, but I must confess relation, through marriage, to a family of “Orange bastards in the north”! Truly. All it takes is an emigration, a conversion of a family member and a marriage and there you are, a recipient of the finest, richest table cloth linen for the Shabbat table from one’s wife’s aunt in Belfast as a wedding present.

            I must also confess to being shocked at the still-living Orange vs Green animosities here when I first stumbled onto this site. It’s not that I’m ignorant of the history or indifferent to its importance; I can take a fellow on a days-long tour of Southern Ontario and show the dividing lines between Catholic and Protestant towns and parts of towns based on architectural nuances such as colour of brick, shape of windows, porches, quoining, ways of dressing stone, decorative mortar jointing, etc. I have recounted stories of conflicts and violence that once took place in the countryside and towns in the 18th and 19th centuries to descendants of those folk and met disbelief or indifference. Almost no one today knows of this bit of Canadian history. And while the history buff in me snorts at such memory loss, such disregard for history, the pragmatist welcomes the peace it brings. Perhaps, one day, future Inspectors and Grandpas in the UK will be able to do better than people here and manage a synthesis of memory without resentment and recriminations.

          • Inspector General

            Avi – to give you a taste of the rich tapestry of everyday life provided by the warm hearted people of Belfast in their dealings with each other, do refer to Wiki article “Bloody Sunday (1921)”

          • Worse than the 1920, which I first thought you meant. Nothing like that in Canada, but deep prejudice against the Irish right up to the mid-70s. I witnessed the tail end of it at my high school in a poor area of Toronto called Cabbage Town. I had no idea what the insults and fights were about, as both the Anglos and the Irish looked equally exotic to me. But by the time I left high school, a European wave of immigrants like me, the music scene, hippie culture, almost sudden tossing of religion and economic booms washed all that away. Cabbage Town is upscale now, the whole city celebrates St Patrick’s and few manage to get to church, much less to temember old conflicts. Few know that in spite of Anglo and Scots class dominance, we’ve had 3 Irish PMs; Lester B Pearson, Brian Mulroney and Paul Martin.

            I hear what you’re saying, but having witnessed such remarkable change in a few short years at the ground level leaves its impact too.

        • It was primarily economic in nature sustained by political control and a misuse of power. The majority of Catholics weren’t into nationalism and they had no “power” because they were denied the vote. Most just wanted work and a descent place to live to raise their children. If Jack had stayed, given his fiery nature as a young man, his life may have taken a very different course.

          • dannybhoy

            “The majority of Catholics weren’t into nationalism and they had no “power” because they were denied the vote.”

            Ireland is historically Catholic Jack, as you know.
            The North had a Protestant (mishmash) majority, who wanted to remain a part of mainland Britain. And looking at it logically they would, wouldn’t they?
            I have nothing against the Republic, and there are some lovely lovely people in the North from all sides. But start up a discussion on this quagmire and it’s death by a thousand grudges…
            You were fortunate to escape Jack, because frankly it just wouldn’t have been worth it. No matter how fiery you are, or were.

          • In all likelihood, it would have been the priesthood or the IRA ….

          • dannybhoy

            Right.
            As I said, you were fortunate to escape…

          • Inspector General

            The Inspector would probably have joined Sinn Fein. It wasn’t always a Nancy boy’s paradise.. And he would have eschewed violence, only carrying a revolver for self defence….

          • dannybhoy

            Lol

          • Inspector General

            They are now vociferous supporters of same sex marriage. Would you believe it!

          • dannybhoy

            Of course I’d believe it, they’re mainly Marxist CINO’s..

          • carl jacobs

            That’s not much of a choice … either a brotherhood of ruthless gangsters or the IRA. Good thing you moved to Essex.

            [Bad carl! Bad! Bad! Bad!]

          • Anton

            Please say more about the vote in NI.

          • Anton

            Thank you Jack. I didn’t know that. It seems that those Catholics who were denied the vote, were denied it not because they were Catholics – which would be a horror – but because they weren’t ratepayers.

            There is a reasonable argument that voting should be restricted to those who pay in more to the State than they take out. Otherwise people can vote themselves the contents of the treasury and the country will eventually go bankrupt – or, in a fiat currency system (which is now universal) be forced to print unbacked banknotes in an inflationary death spiral for the monetary system and for political stability. That is what we are in today, with elections being run as bribery auctions of promises.

          • Do read it again and try to understand just why Catholics were not ratepayers.

          • Anton

            I take the point that OMOV was being used as a vehicle by the Catholics to try to deal with discrimination, rather than an end in itself; and that it was unfair for OMOV not to be implemented in Ulster when it was standard in the rest of the UK. I was widening the discussion to the merits or otherwise of OMOV.

          • You’ve touched the third rail of modern democratic thought; the vote only for those who are less likely to be bought off. Don’t try this one out there.

          • Anton

            It’s already been discussed on previous threads! Let’s be more radical and point out that democracy is not a universal panacaea and works only where there is sufficient consensus for those who lose an election not to resort to violence. That is not rocket science, although it unhappily appeared to be beyond the US State Department to grasp in Iraq and Afghanistan. We’d gladly have faxed to Washington some 150-year-old documents on how to run a colony properly.

          • Well, yes, if it was a real panacea, it wouldn’t have disappeared in its pristine form with the end of our hunter-gatherer stage to re-appear only under free enterprise systems…and rather tentatively at that. And, in the old days you keep a continent with the thin red line; now you need a rope.

          • carl jacobs

            I suspect the Gov’t wanted to make sure that Northern Ireland remained part of the United Kingdom. I suspect they saw in the Catholic population a nascent threat of Republicanism. People will of course say “They should have been given the vote.” Ironic, considering the reaction to Muslims on this very thread.

            Culture is a very powerful motivator, and people will move mountains to make sure their particular culture remains dominant.

    • DanJ0

      Head shots now, apparently.

  • Inspector General

    From the radio news: Death toll now 132, 40000 Syrians still on their way to the UK, and the EU principle of free movement between states is set in concrete. So, it could be a lot more than 40000, unless we quit the EU and PDQ at that…

    One presumes free movement will apply to the wretched Syrians, or is the Inspector mistaken…

    • chiefofsinners

      I suspect that those refugees might not be on their way after all. I also suspect that Angela Merkel is having trouble sleeping.

      • Inspector General

        What do you know, that chief?

        • chiefofsinners

          I never reveal my sources….

      • peter the painter

        Merkel is naive. A victim of the naivety of protestantism. She forgets ..that Lutheranism only had a chance because the rest of Europe was engaged in a serious Ottoman threat on the south east borders at the time.

  • I think the French government has brought these attacks upon itself. We had better watch out, we’ll be next. If the French and ourselves on the instructions of the US hadn’t sent arms to all these crackpot “moderate rebels” in the middle east whilst applying economic sanctions to Syria in the hope that the civilians would turn against the Assad government and oust him, listening to Obama yesterday, he still wants rid of Assad and the government there when it’s really none of his damn business. We meddle at our peril.

    This article first published in May 2013 documents France’s role in supporting terrorist formations in Syria.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/under-the-disguise-of-the-battle-against-terrorism-the-u-s-britain-and-france-support-al-qaeda-in-syria/5336683

    • Ivan M

      See this link from moonofalabama for additional information Marie

      http://www.moonofalabama.org/2015/11/terror-attacks-in-france-some-related-links.html

      • Yes, thank you for your link to yet another Russian affiliate site, Comrade Ivanovich. I see Comrade Maria got you all lathered-up and you rose to the occasion with your contribution to geopolitical analylisis.

        • Ivan M

          Call the untruths in it Avi. Shooting the messenger won’t cut it.

          • Maybe, Ivan, but in times past shooting the propagandist did the job.

          • Ivan M

            Call out the untruths, Avi. You know you cannot.

          • Right, the plea of the crank to be taken seriously enough for a pointless mud-wrestling match over a mishmash of lunacies in 9 point type. Why don’t you stand up for your real beliefs and drag them over here so overyone can have a giggle, instead of hopelessly trying to lure passerby into you fever swamps?

          • mkey

            Ivan, please stop. Frankly you simply haven’t got the brain to take on Avi and the slaughter is becoming unseemly.

            Ah for those simple days when all you guys needed was a gun or a club.

    • WTF?

      I’m sure you know, Marie, but others may not:

      Your “Global Research” is the creation of Michael Chossudovski, a Russian-Jewish professor in Canada who is an antisemitic, Israel-bashing, pro-Russian, pro-Syrian Ba’athist conspiracy theorist, a former Milosevich shill and all around a bat-shit-crazy dude. In other words, a garden variety mouthpiece for Russian nationalist extremists.

      Humour me, Marie, are you a Russian? I only ask because every political opinion you present here is pastiche of positions expressed by the Kremlin, Russian Television and Pravda. To the “T.” I occasionally read-up on genuine British extremists and odd-balls just to keep up with the changing styles, but your religious and nationalist sentiments are of a different nature, devoid of any connection to English traditions and expressions, tinged with a Slavic kind of jingoism. Just a tad over-the-top, kind of like Russian fashions or facial make-up styles, you know what I mean?

      And what’s with your bizarre warning, an ominous threat really, to your and my countrymen to leave Russia’s puppet/buddy Assad to his butchery: “We had better watch out, we’ll be next…we meddle at our own peril.”?

      Gosh, this is beyond freaky, Marie. Say you had a bad date, overdid the shots of Stolichnaya and didn’t really mean it…because with our Canadian Air Force boys over there, in the current shit-hole of the world, rubbing elbows with the crazy Ivans, I consider such crap very serious business indeed.

      • carl jacobs

        Well, just before I go to bed here…

        I have never heard of this Chossudovski guy. But I would say that 1) there are no Muslim rebels anywhere currently worth supporting 2) Syria would be better off under Assad than under any available alternative 3) the US should stay out of it and 4) if the Russians want to fight there, that’s fine by me.

        • Ivan M

          Which is what any plain joe, anywhere in the world would conclude after seeing news. Though of course you don’t need me to support your position.

        • Just turning in too.

          Let Google be your friend;

          1) I support all Muslim rebels, governments tyrannies and whatnots in their family spat equally and wish them all success…simultaneously;

          2) Too late for Assad and Syria is history. Only the USSR kept it alive, and the bare-chested muzhik won’t be able to;

          3) Of course the US should stay back…and arm the Kurds for real, and let them take their chunk out of the corpse;

          4) Absolutely, the Russians in yet another quagmire, breaking their teeth on another set of mujahedeen is the best thing that could happen to Ukraine, the Baltics, NATO, the world….

          • Ivan M

            Isn’t the breakup of Syria all that this about for you Avi? Get a chunk of Syria, for you beloved Israel and mash up Hizballah in the bargain whatever the cost to the Syrians. At least show your bonafides, and not hide behind humanitarian concerns. And also also get some revenge for Khodorkovsky and all oligarchs crushed by Vlad.

          • What humanitarian concerns have I ever hid behind, Ivan? Like your fake concerns about “Palestinians” and “their” land? The only Muslims you mysteriously care about? Syria has been Israel’s enemy since day one, but under the Assads has been at least reliably incompetent. And unlike many “realpolitik” junkies here, I don’t wish the Assads and their Russian keepers on anyone. Forgive me for wanting Jew-killers like Hezbollah dead; while pretending to be Chrustian, you conveniently forget they have killed more Christians than even ISIS. And you actually think I worry about Khodorovsky and the rest of the mafia, Putin included? Are you drunk? Go back to your Protocols and stop pretending to be clever…or a Catholic.

        • PS Regarding your last point, Carl. Since when are you ok with slinking away and letting Ivan have his piece of the Med? Did the seven years of the Obamamessiah crush your mojo as well? Can’t imagine you digging a shelter, stocking up on freeze-dried MREs and casting bullets for your flintlock.

          • carl jacobs

            Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council and as such is just as fully sovereign over the UN as the United States. It is free to intervene when and where it chooses. That’s a right I guard for the US. I can’t therefore deny it to the Russians. So long as they don’t collide with American interests, I would not interfere. And, frankly, I think it is in everyone’s interest to restore Assad. It’s ironic, isn’t it? People beat the hell out of GWB for removing Hussein and destabilizing the ME. But here they suddenly want to remove Assad. Tells you everything you need to know about the real objections to the Second Iraq War.

            In broader terms, I think US policy towards Russia has suffered from rectal-cranial inversion. Why do we have Article V guarantees for the Baltic states when there is not a chance the West would ever fight for them? Why are we mucking around in Ukraine when Ukraine is a vital Russian interest and must eventually return under Russian control? We don’t have the will to stop it. Why anger the Russians for nothng?

            We need rapprochement with Russia. We don’t need confrontation. They aren’t the Soviets anymore. The US is not a natural enemy of Russia. We shouldn’t act like we are its enemy.

          • Really, Carl, you think you can make time go back, restore Assad and an intact Syria to the halcyon days (for single-digit percentage of Alawites and somewhat secular Syrians), have everyone forget about the bloodbaths and turbo-Islam. And leave it to Russia to do all that?

            Don’t get me wrong, a tame kleptocrat on a short leash is preferable for all concerned. Better than the mullahs nosing around or ISIS burning everything in sight, but you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

            About Russia, you Yanks really do have this faith in reset buttons, don’t yo? The uninterrupted corruption, tyranny, jingoism and nascent fascism, the easy switch from primitive ideology back to primitive religion and Big Man Putin should have reset your understanding of Russia back to default. You just don’t get continuity, the unstoppable momentum of a Behemoth that hasn’t chaged substantially since before the Mongol invasions. Macdonalds restaurants and Microsoft in Moscow won’t do the job, exceot to fool you.

            I’m not saying US and Russia have to be enemies, but you are such to them simply because you are strong and get in their way. And while it’s nice of you to want to give them room and respect under whatever political formalities, you’ll nevet get a thank you, because they are not stupid and see it as is: weakness and laziness.

          • carl jacobs

            Avi

            you think you can make time go back

            I don’t have any idea what can be done about Syria. I am however sure that whatever the West tries to do will only make it worse. Unless of course the West is willing to fight a bloody and explicitly punitive war against ISIS. Is anyone willing to do that? No. So we should just stay out of it. No soldiers. No aircraft. We screwed up Libya because it was too easy to do. We bailed on Iraq when things got too hard. We won’t do any better in Syria. The collapse of Assad would simply reproduce Libya. It sure isn’t going to produce a more stable and more agreeable gov’t.

            Now if someone else wants to fight in Syria, that’s not my concern. If the US has no vital interest worth fighting for, then I don’t see why it would try to stop someone else from fighting. If the Russians or the Europeans want to bomb ISIS, they can do so with my blessing. But I wouldn’t supply any American support. Just as I wouldn’t have supplied any support to the campaign against Libya. The ME would be much better off today if the US had just said “No” to that whole crazy idea. A child could have predicted how it would turn out.

            you Yanks really do have this faith in reset buttons, don’t you?

            I don’t have any illusions about Russia. I also don’t have illusions about the US. Can you actually see the US going to war with Russia over Lithuania? This is the perfect way to destroy NATO – pledge a guarantee of war that cannot be fulfilled. Russia is a powerful state, and powerful states have both spheres of influence and legitimate vital interests. There is no good reason for other states to muck around with those vital interests. That’s not weakness. That’s prudence. It’s too bad for Ukraine, but the US military does not exist to secure its independence. The relationship of the US with Russia is quite frankly more important than the independence of Ukraine.

            I have said it before, and I will say it again. I hate the idea of Pax Americana. I do not want to police and govern the world. It is not realistic to expect the US to maintain a unipolar world over time. No nation has the capacity to do that. The US shouldn’t try. So that means competing poles are going to arise whether we like it or not. The US ultimately cannot prevent that outcome, and it is foolish to antagonize those nations during this process. Why make needless enemies? This is not the same thing as appeasement. I’m a hawk and not an appeaser. You know that. There are lines that cannot be crossed. But I am more than anything a realist. And it is the height of idiocy to try to maintain reach that you no longer have the strength to enforce. A good deal of that reach was not built on American strength. It was built on adversarial weakness.

            You call it lazy and weak. Well, so be it. There are still allies to defend, and treaties to enforce, but the US does not need global deployment anymore. It needs rather to shape the development of the coming multipolar world to its own strategic benefit.

          • Ok, a rather lengthy way of saying that you are, for the most part, an isolationist. Nothing wrong in that. Nothing wrong also with the opposing side on the conservative spectrum, which argues that only US engagement and dominance under a pax Americana can assure success, if not survival of the US and the West. As you may guess, I side with the latter. And I think the historical and empirical evidence backs it; Western (read primarily US) engagement to secure functioning democracies and freedom of trade and movement is a matter of civilizational life or death. And this entails staring down tyrants on principle, standing up for the weak and bringing order to chaos. Call it colonialism or manifest destiny, but whatever it is, it’s part of an ancient human drive to conquer, create and improve.

            No, the world will not end if Russia gains dominance in Europe, the ME and the Med and NATO collapses, or if China takes control of Asia and dominates NZ and Australia, but life, to paraphrase Hobbes, will return to being short, ugly and brutish. Besides, why build an armed force that can destroy all the armed forces in the world combined and simultaneously, probably within a fortnight, just to have it sit at home and watch the primitives carve up the world for themselves?

        • Right about Assad. How is it that our leaders learned nothing from the consequences of their downing of Saddam and then Gaddafi?

      • Avi, you make me laugh, no I’m not Russian, I don’t drink much and I’ve not been on any dates. I love England, but my eyes are open.
        Instead of sneering might you not be asking the real reason why the Yanks, France and UK want rid of Assad & his gov? Why are they arming all these anti Assad factions to the hilt and are now are trying to get Pr. Putin to do the same? But he knows that they are mercenaries that go and work for the side paying the highest wages. That’s not going to beat ISIS but it will ensure that the place is flooded with weapons. We need to look at the motives of our Western governments. Are they not all tangled up too much with the motives of the Saudi’s?

        Prof Chossudovsky has told a few unpalatable truths about Israel too even though he’s of Russian Jewish stock himself) and I guess that’s why you are not keen on him. Hundreds maybe thousands of different writers/researchers/analysts/journalists contribute to Global Research as well. The article I posted is from Phil Greaves.
        There’s no need to condemn them all as bat-shit-crazy!

        Phil Greaves is a UK based
        writer/analyst, focusing on UK/US Foreign Policy and conflict
        analysis in the Middle East post WWII.
        http://notthemsmdotcom.wordpress.com/

        • I’m always glad to amuse, Marie, but my guesses and musings are just hunch-based speculations and just as plausible as your claims and denials. Fun and games. But as a persistent shill for the Russian Television, a known massively funded propaganda arm of the Russian government, and its sponsored crackpots like Chossudovski, you must know by now that you are on Western intelligence watch list as a matter of routine monitoring of all low-level “agents of foreign interference.” Your ominous and incoherent “warning” to here (who exactly should Britain worry about if meddling with Russia and its pet, Assad?) most certainly lit up some software somewhere.

          I’m not interesting in debating supposed merits of arguments disseminated by a hostile foreign propaganda agency and its lackeys. Nor am I interested in

          • How can you say terrorism is fun and games Avi, really! You need to come out of your Jewish bubble and lay off the Scotch and herring for a while, why not try a lovely pork schnitzel?
            If you’re having trouble with ads/spy-ware you might need to clear your cache, update your browser/operating system.

            It doesn’t take a genius to work out that ISIS/ISIL are angry at their holds in Syria and Iraq being destroyed and taken back. Land grabbing and barbaric torturing is all Al-Baghdadi as Caliph has. So naturally they will want to hurt those that are having success stopping them.

  • Dreadnaught
    • Anton

      The usual mixed bag from Hastings. A deeper writer would have looked at the Quran and Hadith on the subject. Hastings is correct about mosques but Edward Snowden did a good deed and Theresa May is busy taking away the liberties that make US better than THEM.

      • Dreadnaught

        A deeper writer would have looked at the Quran and Hadith on the subject.
        I thinks that’s a bit dumb considering for 1500 years Muslims have been reading them and still don’t understand Islam – well according to most of the media anyway.

        • Anton

          You believe the media?

          • I think he means the media with its endless attempts to define “real” Islam as just another peaceful religion hijacked by a few “exttemists” and its people as ordinary folks just like us.

          • Anton

            Yes, I wasn’t sure.

          • Dreadnaught

            Yes Anton I was being sarcastic.

          • dannybhoy

            Just like us??
            Avi, you don’t believe in the power of the mob?!
            People who stand up for the Truth will always be a minority and suffer for it..

        • peter the painter

          If only the Shiites ran Mecca..(swoon)

        • Yes Dreadster, it’s remarkable how many jihadist gunmen have been so tragically deceived into the wholly erroneous belief that the teachings and practices of Muhammed somehow involve the forceful subjugation of infidels? Bali, Madrid, New York, Paris, Mumbai, Beiruit, Mosul….how can so many Muslims misunderstand the religion of peace so badly- and all in the same way?

          The answer is clear- send some of the great Islamic scholars of the BBC. Like Jim Nauchtie down to explain the true meaning of Islam to ISIS. That’ll learn ’em.

      • dannybhoy

        I imagine the average Muslim is as ignorant of the Hadith and Quaran as the average Anglican is of the 39 Articles of the Church of England!

        The majority of people function perfectly well without ever knowing let alone understanding the finer points of theology and practice.

        In the West most Muslims will be nominal in their faith, a smaller group will be devout but peaceful, and a very small minority will be dangerously devout. They will either be seeking to impose Islam on the whole world, or punishing their country of residence for implementing a foreign policy they regard as an attack on their co religionists and the sovereignty of Islam.

        Unless the peaceful Muslim community cooperate in exposing those who mean us harm, then the whole of society will lose the freedoms and values that made us.

        And frankly, how keen would any of us be to do that to our own people?

        • Anton

          I imagine the average Muslim is as ignorant of the Hadith and Quaran as the average Anglican is of the 39 Articles of the Church of England!

          Perhaps, but he only needs to take the Quran (sections 8 and 9) more seriously to be changed into a jihadist.

        • johnathomas

          The muslims you refer to are very likely peaceful – but most likely they will still believe that shariah law is better than democracy; and their concept of ‘peace’ will involve the peace of Allah, which is all people everywhere turning to the Islamic faith, not what we mean by ‘peace’.

      • carl jacobs

        Edward Snowden is a traitorous SOB who should be buried inside a prison in a 6′ x 9′ cell. Unless it can be shown that he got someone killed. In which case he should be buried under the prison in a 6′ x 2′ x 1.5′ box. But then I always have been somewhat lenient in my attitude towards the punishment for treason.

        • Anton

          If it can be reliably shown that he got someone killed then he should indeed be tried for treason. If not, he is a whistleblower warning the people of the USA what their government is doing to them without their consent and is a patriot reminding them of the purpose of the Second Amendment.

          The true greatness of any great nation consists in its people, not its government.

  • William Lewis

    Charles Moore calls it in the DT today:

    “The grim fact is that we have within our midst thousands of people whose lives are devoted to doing our society harm and tens of thousands more who are susceptible to the lies they tell. Yet still our policies magnify their voices and swell their numbers.”

  • I am increasingly, whether I like it or not, coming to the conclusion that the late Fred Phelps was right about many things. Not least that a sovereign and righteous God is going to rub our faces in the bitter consequences of our rejection of his dear Son Jesus.

    In my bad library located in the downstairs toilet I keep 3 world changing books for study. The Quran sits next to Origin of Species and Mein Kampf, near to Neitzche, Dawkins, Spong and Teilhard de Chardin

    . Everything is connected. Wake up and smell the taquiyah, dhimmis. We probably can’t stop this but the injunction to watch and pray means we need to understand it. Reading the Quran, and some history, is now the duty of anyone who thinks western civilisation ( formerly known as Christendom) is worth saving. The liberal secular humanist fantasy is unraveling.

    God have mercy on all us sinners, including our Laodicean church.