The Charlie Hebdo terrorists and Western tolerance
The still-at-large suspects in the Charlie Hebdo massacre in France fall into the dreaded category of native-born jihadis. The brothers Kouachi, one of whom had served time for trying to get to Iraq to fight the Americans, apparently fell off the radar screen afterwards—or at least enough off the radar screen to have successfully perpetrated the heinous attack yesterday.
Or did he? I was wondering how, considering that the assailants were masked, the brothers had been identified so quickly by police. This is the only information I’ve seen that sheds any light on that subject:
It said that the police had identified the suspects after one left his identification papers in the abandoned Citroé«n vehicle used to escape after the attack on Charlie Hebdo.
To me that seems rather odd. Why would either suspect be carrying ID in the first place, under the circumstances? And why would that ID have been kept in the car? It’s certainly not outside the realm of possibility, of course. But it’s also at least remotely possible that the ID was a plant of some sort in order to deflect attention from the real perpetrators.
Islamist terrorist perpetrators in Europe rely on the tolerance of Western countries in order to operate. That tolerance takes several forms. The first is a tolerance of immigration; the Kouachis were born in France, but they are of Algerian descent, and most terrorists so far have either been immigrants or the children of immigrants. The second is, of course, religious tolerance; Islam is not the traditional religion of the West and yet Muslims are not discriminated against and are allowed to practice their religion freely. The third is freedom of speech, and that is the one that terrorists utilize when it serves their purposes but fight when it allows speech they consider offensive and/or blasphemous.
That’s the hallmark of the Muslim presence in the West: take advantage of the tolerance they need, and fight the tolerance that bothers them, relying on the goodwill of the locals to accommodate their contradictory demands. The Charlie Hebdo attack was not an act of terror perpetrated on random individuals; it specifically targeted freedom of speech and of the press, two of the pillars of Western society. Will this function as any sort of wake-up call for Europe?
It will be very interesting to see how France—and the rest of Europe—reacts. If the brothers are captured alive, will they be tried as murderers or terrorists? France has abolished the death penalty—would there be calls to reinstitute it?
Le Pen is already calling for a referendum on the reinstatement of the death penalty.
The French are so odd; in the blink of an eye they can pivot from being surrender-monkeys to being real hardasses…
i explained this soviet marxist thing as a process.
push pop…
you push down the dominant
uplift the lower till it has power
then let them go at each other
resulting in a marxist future
ie. HEGEL
the thesis, and antithesis…
normally, the antithesis is not strong enough to oppose the power base. so the politicians hold down the thesis, till the antithesis is strong enough, then they let them destroy each other, creating marxist synthesis.
note that while everyone is trying to understand the issue, they ignore the process that explains this everywhere you look among disparate things….
race, religion, sex education, feminism, capitalism
black/white, judeo christian/islam, normality/perversion, men/women, capitalism/marxism, country/country, city/state, state/federal
duh… one answer that covers it all..
the leaders are using the process to smash all power but their own, until all that remains is a marxist dictatorship..
IF you took the time to read the recomended readings, you would actually find whole books on the process… but i guess its more fun to pretend one is sherlock holmes, or poirot, and try to figure it out absence knowlege… looks more like clousseau to the ones that know the process though – which makes it easy for the elite to look down at their victims/constituency
Excerpt from Hegel for Beginners
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/help/easy.htm
Hegel’s grand idea is “totality” which preserves within it each of the ideas or stages that it has overcome or subsumed. Overcoming or subsuming is a developmental process made up of “moments” (stages or phases). The totality is the product of that process which preserves all of its “moments” as elements in a structure, rather than as stages or phases.
how do you break the power of your opposition that can crush you if it was aware of your breaking?
one, you dont..
two, you use a proxy
three, you use a diamond to cut a diamond, thesis antithesis
this is why russia fights the US in proxy
this is why the leftists in state, use rubes to fight as proxy
the idea is to let others do the dirty work…
then collect the results
From Russia With Love —
(Movie Clip) Siamese Fighting Fish
http://www.tcm.com/mediaroom/video/240517/From-Russia-With-Love-Movie-Clip-Siamese-Fighting-Fish.html
once you put on the right colored glasses
the view of the game reveals itself
like a embeded code that requires red lenses to read
No. After stirring for a few moments, they will hit the snooze button to enjoy a few minutes more of drowsing, before dying.
Let’s hope that France and the rest of Europe reacts more robustly than they have so far. I heard one French woman expressing her shock and anger at (dare she say it?) “fundamentalists.” I’ve heard a lot of thumb-sucking and hand-wringing about how this might arouse “the right wing.” I’ve seen a lot of flowers and candles and a lot “Je suis Charlie” from people who are definitely NOT Charlie. They’re still alive. I believe the police and military and intelligence services are doing their damnedest (and the French constabulary can be very ruthless and tough!) but I am afraid that Europe is “sicklied o’er with the pale caste of thought” and they want to think this whole horror away with as little action as possible. The media will be reluctant to publish any pictures of “The Prophet,” of course because, let’s face it, terror of this kind really works. I’d like to see widespread publication (and some coverage!) of Egyptian President Sissi’s speech for starters.
I would argue that Islamist terrorist perpetrators in Europe rely as much on Western denial, as they do on the tolerance of Western countries in order to operate. That denial takes several forms. The first is a denial of the cost of immigration from societies whose operative principles are in fundamental opposition to Western principles. The second is denial of Islam’s inherent nature; Islam is an expansionist, totalitarian ideology wrapped within the facade of religion. The third is denial of why they have come to Europe; “One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.” Algerian leader Houari Boumedienne speaking at the UN, 1974
“The Charlie Hebdo attack was not an act of terror perpetrated on random individuals; it specifically targeted freedom of speech and of the press, two of the pillars of Western society. Will this function as any sort of wake-up call for Europe?”
Rotherdam argues otherwise.
“If the brothers are captured alive, will they be tried as murderers or terrorists?”
They will be tried as… victims.
“France has abolished the death penalty–would there be calls to reinstitute it?”
Le Pen will issue calls but a confused society filled with muddled thinking, that hasn’t a clue as to the actual rationale for capital punishment will remain indecisive.
carl in atlanta:
Winston Churchill on the Hun (Germans) could apply here: they’re either at your throat or at your feet.
Artfldgr,
Trying to ‘explain’ everything within a “soviet marxist thing” is the intellectual equivalent of when, “the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail”.
Hegel was an intellectually pretentious idiot. “Maurice Merleau-Ponty wrote, “All the great philosophical ideas of the past century–the philosophies of Marx and Nietzsche, phenomenology, German existentialism, and psychoanalysis – had their beginnings in Hegel…”
In other words, Hegel was the grandfather of the left.
Ah Europe, whose arguably three most influential nations are Germany, England and France. To Churchill’s evaluation of the Germans, “they’re either at your throat or at your feet”, add Alexis de Tocqueville’s observation of the other two; “The French want no-one to be their superior. The English want inferiors. The Frenchman constantly raises his eyes above him with anxiety. The Englishman lowers his beneath him with satisfaction.”
Clair Berlinski addressed this issue in depth in her book called Menace in Europe. She has a chapter in it called “Self-Extinguishing Tolerance.” Her book addresses what she calls “cultural suicide in the name of tolerance.” The book was published in 2006, and her predictions are right on target.
For all the talk of social solidarity in France as a significant French value, I can’t see how there really is in fact a coherent culture or value system there, or even many shared goals among the variously competing interests.
I also doubt that if the Sacré-CÅ“ur Basilica were shot up, and a dozen actual worshipers (as opposed to tourists) killed by Muslims, that the left would reciprocate the conservatives’ concern and outrage over the Charlie Hebdo massacre, to anything like the same degree.
Many leftists resent its presence to this day, and see its very existence as “divisive”.
For perspective on the sociocultural situation in France, you will note in the following, the offhand parallel made by the author while remarking on the building up of a Muslim Party in France:
http://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015/01/02/scare-tactics-michel-houellebecq-on-his-new-book/
neo-neocon Says:
January 8th, 2015 at 3:07 pm
carl in atlanta:
Winston Churchill on the Hun (Germans) could apply here: they’re either at your throat or at your feet.”
I think that that applies to much of the human species; and that those who are content to be left alone to hoe their own row, are in something of a minority. Plenty would rather die or kill, than be ignored.
We spent 3 weeks in France in 1996 with a Parisian friend and one of the conversations centered on the influx of West Africans who were employed to do the jobs the French didn’t want to do. One of the things that was important to the Parisians is that their streets would be hosed-down every morning. At that time, my Insight Guide to Paris recorded that 1 in 3 Parisians lived alone. My then 7-year old, after 1 week asked me, “Where are all the people my age?” “Population Jihad” is a known entity among the Muslims. Western culture has been on a death spiral for years, trading inconsequential things for the important ones.
When we in the west acknowledge that these murderous attacks are not the acts of ‘extremists’ but the acts of muslims following the koran implementing sharia law we might actually begin to realize the real problem: ISLAM.
The id in the abandoned get away car is puzzling. It does look like a plant to deflect attention from the real terrorists. Say what you want about the French, but the national police is a competent force. I doubt they would be fooled by such a tactic.
If Islamist terrorist perpetrators in Europe and America rely on the tolerance of Western countries in order to operate — and they do — the only thing to be done is deny them that which they deny others. Extremism in the defense of freedom is graced by latitude, extremism in the pursuit of submission is illegitimate from the start.
Deny freedom to the one who would proscribe it.
Deny free speech to those who would prohibit it.
Deny freedom of religion to those who would forbid it.
No culture/country is obliged to relegate itself to the dust bin of history by means of beneficence, no civilization is obliged to enter into a suicide pact by means of tolerance, and common sense must trump legalism. It is past time to deal with Islam proper as it warrants. I had just recently commented elsewhere — in response to the question what is to be done about Islam, thus:
I take the answer as having been given us — historical precedent, i.e., geopolitical apartheid. Of course it is one of little or no avail as long as the treacherous among us insist on cultural mosaicism.
From the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)
Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
As most every Islamic country — and Islam itself — is manifestly in violation of Article 18 every second of every day it would suggest some member nation of the UN would have made an issue of it at some point. Until such time as the OIC Islamic countries comply, within their own borders and religion, de facto and de jure, they should be expelled from the UN. But then, every Western nation is as fundamentally corrupt and frightened as Islam is unconscionable.
Our continued association with the UN does not speak well of us but says volumes about our willingness, along with the rest of the West, to invoke righteousness and simultaneously, and in confronting Islam, timorously disregard it.
The trouble is, I think, not so much with Islam as it is with us.
BTW, Article 18 is only one of at least a half dozen Articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that Islam routinely violates, declaratively and procedurally.
Do what we can and must here in the West with Muslims but drive home the point to the heart — all Islamic countries — geopolitical apartheid. Islam either assimilates or it relegates itself back to the century from whence it came.
The situation in Germany is rather complicated because most of the Muslims were Turks who came as workers after the war. Both they and the Germans figured they would return home, but they didn’t. Today Turks are starting their own homes for the eldery, as these people realize that Turkey is no longer their home. Anyway, the people who came here had lived under the secular Attaturk government and many did not go to the mosques.
But since they were assumed to be guest workers, there was no attempt to assimilate them or their children. Many of the latter were still married off to cousins back home, so each family had a fresh infusion of life back home, which mostly meant father was boss and mother wore a veil. The kids growing up (especially in cities where there were mainly Turkish neighborhoods) had little opportunity to observe other types of male/female relationships, and education was not highly valued.Better that the girls stayed home to help mom with the younger kids and housework than that she go to school regularly.
Most of these people were not at all radical, but as the more fundamentalist Imams from Turkey came in, they reached out to the young. These were especially vulnerable, being condemned to a low status job and not even able to select their partner.
So Germany is now trying to reach out to these nonviolent groups. However, we now have an influx of refugees from Islamic countries who are not particularly trusted and are costly for communities to house and feed. The government is trying to tread a line between further assimilation efforts, fulfilling a moral obligation to take care of people who might be killed if sent home, and responding to concerns of protesting citizens, who may have some neo-Nazis involved in their movement. It is not helpful either that Erdogan sometimes stirs up trouble with the Turks who live here. And, of course, There was the former discussion of making Turkey part of the EU. This was looked at skeptically by politicians who had a picture of the broader implications, but there were plenty of do-gooders who are fond of open doors.
That’s about where it stands now.
GP,
I agree with you, but monsters wil never be shunned by the UN. What we need to do is to kick the UN off our shores and stop all trade with many of the states where islam is predominant. Lets start with Saudi Arabia.
To point out the obvious, Islam is a totalitarian political system with a veneer of religion. In Islam the state and religion are one. It’s like the good old days when the king was head of the state and head of the church. A state religion is a prescription for continual violence. Do a Google on thirty years war. That’s why the US constitution prohibits a state religion. Why Muslims, who believe in a state religion, are welcomed here is beyond me.
Those that are too weak to make their speech free, will have others… actually no, they won’t even get free protection from others, aka the State or the Regime. They’ll just be slaughtered as the vermin, livestock, and serfs always knew they were going to be slaughtered. This generation of livestock just think they are free.
Y,
I am free. My wife is free. My sons and daughter are free. My oldest grandchild is 14 and free, and she can almost shoot better with a rifle or 357 revovler than her granddaddy. My siblings and their extended families are free. My immediate neighbors are free. You need to hang out with a better class of people. If you are free in your spirit you are free until the fascists kill you.
“Secrecy is the keystone to all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy and censorship. When any government or church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, ‘This you may not read, this you must not know,’ the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man who has been hoodwinked in this fashion; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, whose mind is free. No, not the rack nor the atomic bomb, not anything. You can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.” R.A. Heinlein
It is abundantly clear to conservatives in this country that Islam is not compatible with freedom, democracy, religious tolerance, and many other values that we hold dear. Thus, it is clear that the West and Islam cannot coexist unless Islam changes or we surrender by converting.
It’s war, but so far, it’s only being waged by one side. What does it take to wake the progs – a mushroom cloud? Probably wouldn’t phase them. They would describe it as massive-scale, cult-like, workplace violence.
PC and multi-culti sentiments are nothing more than a suicide pact offered up by those who will tolerate the intolerable. Where is our leader who will fight?
The Islamic terrorists want the same rights as liberal societies: pro-choice and material opiates (e.g. Obamacare). Their problem is that they do not appreciate the squeamish character of Western liberals. Liberals have a libertine religion and narcissistic faith (i.e. atheism). However, they do not enjoy real-world consequences in their backyard, unless it’s simulated, and the blood and gore is restricted to fantasy/fetish or sanitized in state-sponsored/sanctioned “clinics”. If the Islamic terrorists want to be accepted by other natural born killers (once, mistake; FEMENist), then they need to conduct decapitation and dismemberment in the privacy of a clinic, away from “decent” men and women. Instead of attacking Hebdo, they could have learned how bigots, including Hebdo, manage the cognitive dissonance created by their irreconcilable positions.
It is self-evident that human life is a process that begins at conception and ends with a natural, accidental, or premeditated (e.g. abortion) death. So, when does human life acquire and retain value and by whose choice?
The Islamic terrorists, the Chinese Communists, and other “illiberal” groups managing unwanted clumps of cells want to know! Incidentally, this is why the Chinese Communists have stopped returning calls to so-called “human rights” businesses and even mock liberal displays of bigotry.
In related news —
I went to the Diamond District today (47th St.) and the wife of the appraiser I visited there confided to me that the Orthodox Jews she knows are telling her that anti-Semitism has never been so bad in New York in their lives, especially for those wearing distinctively Jewish garb.
“The old folks are saying it’s as bad as it was in the 1930s,” she said grimly.
Re: the musselman
Christopher Hitchens remarked acidly that our appeasement of Islam is a course of masochism that is urged upon us by sadists.
The press as a pillar of Western civilization?
That’s pretty pathetic, for any civilization to call that a pillar.
You need to hang out with a better class of people. If you are free in your spirit you are free until the fascists kill you.
Are you trying to say that you can change the nature of humanity or something?
Can’t quite believe that. I didn’t say the people around me were slaves, I’m talking about society at large or humanity at large.