Terror Attack: 130 Dead in Paris

[Gilrandir]

I enjoy the many cultures that London contains, and I wouldn't want to homogenise it. But there are some positions that are antithetical to the liberal world that I love. Islamism is one.

Who will sort out the things which should stay in this unhomogenized London and which shouldn't? Who will draw the borderline between "this is alien but it's OK" and "it is so unBritish"? As I said: one has to pay some price for letting international cuisine in and hoping that all international intrusion will stop at that. Evidently dealing with the situation in the way you suggest will presuppose letting liberalism alone.

My dear, if the Islamist attack France it is because France represents all what they hate. France embraces life when they embrace death, France values liberty, they value slavery, France values equality, they value discrimination, France values Fraternity, they value racism.
France embraces science, secularism, they prefer superstition and obscurantism.
To summary it, let give me the message from a caricaturist Joann SFAR:
"Friends from the whole World, thanks you for your #pray for Paris, but we don't need more Religion! Our faith goes to music! Kisses! Life! Champagne! Joy! Paris is about life".

They value death, so they attack life

So much pathos! When I had expessed a similar one two years ago I was blamed as being too emotionally invested. Perhaps you suggest there should be another march which will show to the world that the French are... what will it show, by the way, and what has the CH one shown?

Own up to it: France's immigartion policies that created the largest islamic community of Europe is what created a fruitful soil for islamists who planted the seeds they wanted.

They blew up a plane with 224 Russians and people asked "Will Putin become more barbarian now?"

Confusing cause and consequence. FIRST Putin became barbarian by starting bombing Syria and THEN the plane was downed.

My hat is off to the French. The thing is that while many people are hurting and afraid because of this senseless violence from few lunatics. France is not going to change. France is not going to turn into a police state and French people will not hover in the corner with a personal weapon for self protection. No they will not let the terrorist win and change into what the terrorist would like for them to become. They will not become victims, but live on. Hurting, with anger and sorrow, but without letting those sentiments control them.

There is a price for freedom and that price is not to live in fear. No matter how much that may cost. Once people understand that, there is no stopping freedom. Without that understanding there never can be freedom. French know and cherish this because they have had their fair share of history of oppression and i am positive that they will never again allow such to happen, not because of pressure coming from outside or within.

For the very same reason Europeans cant close their borders and shut their eyes for the events taking place at Middle East, as the reason for the masses of Asylum seekers are there and those are the very same lunatics that are behind the atrocities that are happening or already have happened at Iraq,Syria,Libya, Lebanon,Egypt and now France.

I'm afraid, CH attack didn't teach the French (and Europeans in general) a lot. You can't live a liberal and carefree life being surrounded by barbarians. You can't live the way you did and hope such things as those in Paris to never happen (again). You gotta adopt some common sense and be more on your guard, as Israel is.

The France that we know of from history is dead. What for may the fresh (and not so fresh) immigrants value Joan of Arc, for example? Or Charles de Gaulle? It is like an ordinary Frenchman can't feel anything special about Saladin who liberated the lands of Muslims from Europeans. No good will come of admixing one culture to another.

Closing borders is the only sensible solution against the future trouble. Of course, it is not a guarantee, yet it is a step on this way. You may be as sorry for the refugees as you like, but solving problems of one person (or even a group of persons) at the expense of others will not make either happier: the first ones will cry for more and develop and deepen in the second the sense of guilt while the second will have to live with it and side by side with the newcomers as well.

[Husar]

Confusing cause and consequence. FIRST Putin became barbarian by starting bombing Syria and THEN the plane was downed.

Confusing my point with your point you are.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The problem with Islamism in Europe is that it's very hard to fight effectively. If you refuse to rise to the bait and crack down on Muslims then that makes it harder to stop these plots, if you do crack down then you create more terrorists. If you try to steer a "middle course" as the UK does then you tend to get the worst of both worlds - it's harder to stop attacks and you still end up ostracising Muslims.

Since 2001 Muslims have become much more visible in Europe - there are a lot of reports of women in their late twenties and thirties deciding to wear headscaves to show that they are Muslim, and of women who wear headscarves deciding to wear veils to more clearly show their faith. There has been a fair amount written about this and their have been quite a few documentaries. One thing that crops up a lot is that the change in dress is often as much performative as pious, the woman in question doesn't feel it makes her a better Muslim so much as she feels a need to show her faith more clearly to non-Muslims.

What this means is that people who were integrated are actually choosing to de-integrate and be ostracised from their own society (they are overwhelmingly second or third generation, or converts).

This is, frankly, a huge problem.

This is one of the reasons why I have argued for a consistent policy on the Middle East - the radically different approaches to Libya and Syria have convinced many at home and abroad that it was "all about the oil" when in fact it largely wasn't. European leaders were moved to support what they saw as a relatively liberal grass-roots revolt against a brutal and insane dictator.

Then, when the Syrians rose up because they believed we would support them too we sat about and wrung our hands about UN resolutions and did little or nothing. As a result the liberal opposition and the mass of people in Syria felt "betrayed" something that was reported in multiple interviews with the early resistence conducted by Western journalists. So now the Syrians were in a fight and had been turned off to the West and Western ideals and then along came IS who creamed off the angry young men and filled the void in fighting the regime.

At the same time Libya fell apart at least partially because of what happened in Syria - without NATO as this great arbiter of holy wrath who dropped fire from the sky the more Right-Wing sections in Libya no longer felt the need to co-operate in forming a government and things unravelled. At the same time the success of IS in Syria and Iraq has emboldened other Islamists and they are attracting adherents across the world - first in the Middle East and now cells in Europe.

So, short term, I say build a Limes to control the flow of people into Europe and fight the Islamists and the tin-pot dictators wherever we find them. Long term, finish weaning ourselves off Saudi oil and then offer them a choice - reform and religious liberalisation or an end to the alliance with the West and Western military hardware.