Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

I In Mine Own House

By

paris-attacks

“I in mine own house am an emperor
And will defend what’s mine.” –Massinger, The Roman Actor [1629]

Sir Edward Coke wrote, “The house of everyone is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defense against injury and violence as for his repose.” I believe the same can be said of one’s country. No matter how much I am maligned and excoriated (even by those who purport to be at my back and fighting the same battle), whether for my choice of friends or my condemnation of enemies, my country is my castle and fortress, as much for my defense as for my repose. But how am I to defend my country when my country is being subverted from within and turned into an enemy of my existence? How is my country to be my repose when I (and those of like mind) have discovered that the enemies of my country conspire under the same flag while posturing as patriots of that flag?

The most imprudent politicians of this country (and almost all politicians are imprudent, in my opinion) are those who believe that the imperialistic tendencies of Islam have lost their charm within our Muslim communities and that the subjugation and/or transmogrification of Western societies is not considered a viable goal of those same communities. I will never believe that such a goal is ever contemplated as an impossible reality by a majority of Canadian (or American) Muslims. Such expansionist contemplation is an essentially prescribed virtue of Islam proper. First you carve, and then you polish.

In his book Infidels, Andrew Wheatcroft objurgates Richard Perle and David Frum and their book An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror with his observation that, “A fifteenth-century manual against witchcraft and a twenty-first century manual against terrorism read rather differently, but their methodology is strikingly similar. Firstly, they lay out the conditions and causes of evil; secondly, they detail how evil spread and how it can be defeated; and thirdly, they present the operational necessities of a war on evil.” Here Mr. Wheatcroft’s argument against Perle and Frum and their proposed prescription for “the war on terror” is exposed as helplessly artless and not very well thought out, simply because witchcraft was an imagined evil, more than anything else a product of Christian superstition, whereas Islamist terrorism is overtly palpable and has caused immeasurable human suffering to date. To compare the war on terror with Christian persecution of witches is obviously simplistic, yet Wheatcroft concludes with unctuous reflection, “Killing witches ran its bloody course and eventually subsided. Can we halt a similar, modern, social panic, in its tracks?” Perhaps Mr. Wheatcroft should ask the citizens of Paris, France on this night of November 13th if they, deep-down, believe their “social panic” right now is merely an over-reaction to the seven terror attacks in that fair city tonight that have cost the lives of over 150 (as tallied thus far) innocent civilians. Should the people of France simply wait until this wave of Islamist terrorism runs “its bloody course”? Does he really believe that the hatred of the infidel (but especially the Jew), as taught in the Quran and from the pulpit of many mosques the world over, will somehow, someday subside and we all go to bed at night with smiling faces?

I believe terrorist strikes similar to the attacks Friday in Paris, France will shortly be carried out against civilian targets in North America. Islamist jihadists are religiously inspired copy-cat murderers. Defenseless civilians (read Jews) were first attacked and stabbed in Israel, and not long afterward defenseless students were attacked and stabbed at the University of California, Merced. And this religiously-inspired, homicidal trend is not just now catching on, nor is it in the slightest measure subsiding. The Charlie Hebdo operation was merely a precursor to bigger and better things for the jihadists living among us. The long list of Islamic barbarities, as reported from France tonight, even now as I write these words, are proof of this. These Islamic atrocities are merely portents of more terrible things to come, I’m sorry to say.

President Obama has just now announced that “those who think they can terrorize the people of France, or the values that they stand for, are wrong.” But you are so wrong, Mr. President. The people of France and the values that they stand for have just been “terrorized,” completely. Their house—their country—has been attacked from within, and time will reveal that these attackers were French citizens, albeit Muslim French citizens, or Muslim immigrants naively welcomed by French authorities into the midst of unassuming French citizens.

In North America, the media and the academia, the subversive elements and driving force that have been directing us to this defenseless pass, remain unaccountable for the erroneous and dictatorial influence that has, more than imprudent politicians, forbidden from broad-stream exposure all those who have been warning us that our houses are being torn down from within. Whatever repose patriotic Canadians and Americans experienced in the past has been removed because our common defense against injury and violence—free speech—has been removed also: we are no longer permitted to point the finger at Islam as being the primary source of this scourge of terrorism now engulfing the Western world. And so long as this expurgatory prohibition is levelled against us, so long as we are forbidden to speak what we perceive as the truth, we are helpless to defend our homes—our castles—from the jihadist’s intent to deprive us of our repose.

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Barack Obama, Canada, France, Jihad in the West, United States, Useful idiots, willful ignorance Tagged With: , ,


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Now that ISIS has told Muslims to use any convenient handy weapon — knives, cars, their bodies — to assault non-believers, here is something I wrote on Jihad Watch at least a year ago.

    1. Buy a personal defense hand gun. There are many “gently used” pre-owned trade-ins at gun shops, and about $300 – $400 can get you one with careful shopping.

    2. Around $50 for 40 rounds (two 20 round boxes) of massive-destruction ammunition, made especially for a close-quarters (20 to 30 feet) shooting situations.

    3. Choose a caliber that is right for your arm strength and stature. Revolvers are best for newbies — auto-loaders have higher capacity magazines but complicated for familiarity

    4. Pick a caliber which is actually available in ammunition. Panic buying now after Paris will take some calibers totally out of availability.

    5.. Gun shop staff are usually very willing to give free advice on all aspects of the best gun for YOU, but if at all possible, go on a WEEKDAY.

    6. When the shit hits the terrorist attack fan — as ISIS promises it will here in the US — remember that amusing darkly humorous quote : If seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

    7. Fret not about the legalities of “the duty of retreat” blather. I will take my chances appearing before a judge at trial ALIVE, having shot a Muslim scumbag ready to kill me, rather than being a DEAD fool who remained unarmed.

    • That’s sophomoric. Firstly, they seek death. Secondly, you are lowering the intellectual tone of this forum, son. A number of former jihad-terrorists are now fine, effective counterjihadists. Please think better thoughts.

      • Sophomoric?
        If they seek death, then we can arrange the meeting if they come calling. No one is advocating murder in the streets – just self defense.
        Yes, practice. Practice is critical. Practice /with the firearm you use for home or personal defense/ – not a .22 you keep around just for plinking.
        Advocating judicious, safe self-defense strategy doesn’t lower the tone of anything. The number of mujihadin who are now counterjihadists is tiny. The times I was deployed, I certainly didn’t expect the IED emplacers to magically become counter-IED specialists; I was locked and loaded.

      • Mortimer, Tracker may seem a bit too enthusiastic but he is absolutely correct on two points.

        1. After seeing unarmed French citizens dead and compatriots dragging the wounded into the street in an attempt to save them there is no question that being armed will lessen the human cost of terrorism. This isn’t about giving the cult of death what it wants, it’s a matter of we and our families continuing our lives, together. Surely your family is worth preserving. Our ancestors, only three generations ago were commonly armed because no law enforcement could arrive in time.

        2. Today, Law Enforcement does not arrive in time nor should one imagine that it could. Police can only provide protection for an expected event.

        I’m not in any panic, but I will, at my own pace, and with additional training since my military snd hunting days, become armed. I will not be like the men who didn’t care about their country and left Syria instead of fighting for it. Ours is a country and a citizenry worth fighting for, even if they are asleep to the ramifications for their future. Preparedness can avoid regret.

        • Eventually, its going to come down to a straight fight, between Muslim invaders and those defending democracy and civilization. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan weren’t defeated by inviting Hitler and Tojo around for a cup of tea and a chat and Islam won´t be defeated by trying to accommodate Muslims and their death culture.

        • When Lee Rigby was hacked to death it took 20 minutes for police to arrive.
          Garland demonstrated “Don’t Mess With Texas”, but go ahead, fine, Mess With UK.

        • “Leaving their country instead of fighting”therein lies the rub. That is exactly why I don’t feel much sympathy for these refugees. For my country I would rather die fighting than run. They just let isis take over.

      • Name one counter Jihadist, Mortimer, name one. Pie in the sky. Oh yes, there is that odd looking pale man who sometimes appears on the Kelly File. Can’t remember his name but he talks a good game.

        Yes, we must remain armed and vigilant to this danger. The only ex-Jihadis are dead ones.

    • How does a handgun fare against a battle-hardened terrorist trained to every sorts of military tactics imaginable, who’s equipped with a bulletproof vest and an assault rifle and would probably draw his gun first?
      The local policemen couldn’t even retaliate with just their handguns and chose to retreat back when Charlie happened, what makes you think a civilian who almost never uses his gun would even stand a chance?
      It does work against Palestinians charging their Israeli target with their knives and Israel’s limited casualties prove it, but an impromptu attack from a civilian and a meticulously planned mass terror attack isn’t quite the same in terms of strength.
      I’m all for self-defense personally by all means, just satiating the thought a bit.

      • They don’t wear armor on their heads–which is an effective way of dispatching them with a handgun. I suppose your theory is that if we can’t kill them all with our handguns, we shouldn’t even try? Not for me.

      • I suggest you look up the word, “Satiate.” You might find it doesn’t make sense in your context.

      • OK, Abu,

        Lets think about the Paris concert massacre. A crowd of people and terrorists armed with automatic weapons. Let’s suppose there were armed military vets in the crowd. Which group, terrorists or vets, must watch for shooters over 360 degrees? Is a man’s width across the thighs much narrower than the hips? What is the result of a torn femoral artery? What is the result of a brain injury?

        The concert became a shooting gallery, and like the moving targets of a carnival, there was no danger to the terrorists. If 10 people in the audience had been armed, how many more would have survived while the terrorists were trying to find cover let alone how many would be saved by disabling or killing the terrorists?

        Disarming a population makes them into defenseless targets for any force bent on their destruction. The MAD doctrine will never dissuade terrorists. It only works between nations. The terrorists are going to Europe because it is both internally defenseless and close.

        A thousand automatic weapons could arrive in a single innocuous shipping container destined for terrorists, many of which are never inspected. The disarming of Europe is likely to have a high cost in innocent lives.

  3. I am struggling with much of what I am seeing and hearing—how have so many members of our species completely lost their instinct for self-preservation? To the point that it is not enough that they themselves to decline the most basic instinct of any species, and refuse to take up arms in their own self defense, but that they feel compelled to prevent others from doing so? In my mind, that is all that responsible bearing of firearms represents—the expression of the innate will toward self-protection, self-preservation. The desire to not depend on the undependable, to not burden others unnecessarily. To live and let live. Whether as a tool against terrorists, thugs, criminals, predators, vermin, or to harvest food/sustenance. Increasingly I do not understand this world and the people in it. If the coastal elites and Eurotards can’t see the idiocy in clamoring that guns don’t stop bad guys with guns….and then have no problem calling for people with those very same (detested! intrinsically evil!) GUNS to come and rescue them from bad people with guns……I feel like I’m losing my mind more and more in this world.

    • Most of those living have never experienced war or known what it is like to expect death at any moment for years. American has never had a war in the homeland since the Civil War.

      As a result we have the expectation that we may lay our head down safely in peaceful slumber and awake the next morning wth mundane problems of bills, getting kids off to school, getting some concert tickets, keeping up with some celebrity etc.

      The expectation of peace has become a habit that flies in the face of reality. We narrowly missed two nuclear wars with the USSR while the people slept; in one of them even the American government was totally unaware.

      The last men I knew well who knew the vagaries of war were my Uncles who served in WWII. When they came home, they never saw life as given to waste. All of them became leaders in their church and communities. They are all gone now but all of them would be ashamed of the lack of patriotism and the excessive hedonism that is weakening the nation.

    • … how have so many members of our species completely lost their instinct for self-preservation?

      I think we’re the first. There are certain species that’ll mass suicide to reduce population overages, but not risk full extinction. In a way, it makes sense. We have surrounded are brains with TV and now video games and other Internet venues, mostly Web ones, but also smart phone apps, so it is possible that we’ve made our brains so programmable that the risk of suicide-by-bad-software is upon us. Sure looks like it. We’re up to 31 governors against accepting “Syrian” “refugees” at this minute, so maybe we’ll avoid extinction.

  4. Yes it is interesting this new “rollover if attacked”. If you read the Homeland Security publications and do their course, their attitude is to ‘run away’ first. Hide if you cant and then attack if you are completely trapped. So the USA has the official policy of run away. There is no ‘attack so you can protect the people around you’
    When I was growing up my dad would never run away. He faced the problem fists ready. His responsibility was to protect us. If he was killed as a result then that was what he was on earth for. He would be disgusted at this new attitude.
    Where did this new ‘run away’ come from? At least on the train in France two guys did not run away. In China in the 1980’s extremists tried to hijack a plane. the Chinese passengers hacked them to death.
    Even if people are scared, the Homeland Security has given them a model, a standard, an official excuse. How can any civilian population defeat the Islamist with this attitude.

  5. Although some ignoramuses still cling to the idea that Islam is only a religion, mainly college professors, it is rightfully viewed as an ideology with great power to direct mass behavior. It is 1,400 years old, so this power is nothing new, but it seems to have metastasized once put into electronic media which gives it immediate global distribution. Add to that modern transportation, especially jet airplanes, and you have the ingredients of an explosion of Islam, leaving only border control as a way to stop it.

    The same ideology power exists elsewhere, not just in the heads of Moslems. What’ we’re seeing in Judeo-Christian countries is a strong tendency to *not* defend home, family or country, but to instead defend the ideals of pan-racialism and pan-theism, and to do so at nearly any cost, including loss of home, family and country.

    Things are coming to a head. This is just a preview, the denouement will come when the spectacular Hijrah we’re seeing now delivers on its potential. There is talk of civil war, but that forgets that new technologies introduced since the last one probably makes that impossible. It’s one thing riding around on a horse or in a wagon carrying a rifle to take on government warriors who have the same. Now they have all the tools and the little guy still has the rifle and the only new thing he has is a car instead of a horse or a wagon. True, we’ve got phones now, but so do they, along with radio networks, and they can monitor all networks.

    I predict that efforts at civil war will be marginal and wholly unsuccessful, with the outcome realizing the Marxian dream of a series of central government state in control not only of resources but also of communications and movement. The only possible way the civil wars can be won is revolt within the armed forces and police forces of the nation being brought under the heel of Sharia.

    But this is of little import, cuz the real clear and present danger to our well being is Global Warm… er, Climate Change, environmental disaster that will wipe us all out, even the Ayatollahs and Sheicks who’ve just take control.

    • Now there is a strategy that European “leaders” would readily adopt! Just wait for the rising ocean to drown the Islamic Terrorists. Why did I not think of that?

      You’ve done it again, Farmer. You’re always one step ahead of the EU pacifist leaders, anticipating their thoughts before they even thunk ’em.

  7. It is very dangerous to say that your country is your house. And by the way, your country is not your house. Most fascist love saying that their country is their house because it helps them to justify attacks on people that they wouldn’t want in their houses, but that are legal residents of the country. I have heard fascists justifying attacks on legal immigrants saying “I don’t want them in my house”. The problem is that the country is not your house. You can kick someone from your house just because you don’t like his face, but you cannot attack someone who has been accepted by the State just because you don’t like his face.

    • You AND your apparently skewed idea of “the State” that you so obviously hold as your personal authority and enforcer of “All that’s correct” for the rest of us (by your and the “State’s” edict), may be asked (and none too politely) to LEAVE THIS HOUSE too. Don’t get too puffed up with yourself just yet, simply because you and the other socialist/Marxist/jihadist sympathizers and moochers have like-minded apologists in the W.H.

      You and your version of “the State” won’t be telling too many like myself what we will, or will not, do, ever.. Get clear on this.

      • I am not a Marxist, I am simply a law-abiding citizen that does not believe in taking justice into my own hands. Each state has laws and democratic elections. If you want to change something in your country, change the laws or vote for another party, but never go around claiming that your country is “your house” because the distance between claiming that and hurting people is very short. You don’t decide who is entitled to live in your country, the State does. The reason for this is that you may be a crazy lunatic.

  9. I understand why so many people feel the need to protect themselves. They are aware of the type of enemy we are facing …an enemy that POTUS does not even openly recognize. Anyone studying the subject see that this is a religious war conductred by Islam against the infidels (us.) They still refer to Christians as Crusaders. What side does Obama favor?