1. Owen says

    Yep. And I hope you don’t mind another long comments, but 4 years ago, I wrote:
    Europe seems have become a kind of Jihadi paradise. It is at once a godless community of temptations both material and carnal that despises young Muslims for their otherness while admiring them for their conviction. The epitome of multicultural tolerance, it makes no serious attempt to assimilate Muslims in the name of that ideology, thereby effectively condemning them to an underclass existence while marinating them in a protest-based political culture. In orgies of self-loathing, Europeans can stand arm-in-arm with terrorists, waving signs proclaiming “We are all Hezbollah”.
    In this paradoxical land where so much is allowed but so little is approved of, legions of marginalized young men in search of clarity and greater meaning can find both in the local mosque, and acting out their fantasies of redemption requires nothing more than a trip to the local train station. Europe itself provides them with motive and opportunity, and the Jihadi terror masters with the method. Little wonder then that the fastest growing population of radicalized young Muslims seems to be found there.
    Should my statement of the conditions approximate the truth and Europe be unequal to the task of dealing with it, I foresee a singularly disturbing possibility: Even if we defeat the Jihadis in the Middle East, could Muslim Europe provide a potential refuge; a reservoir for re-infection if you will?
    If so, the most serious challenge of our times may not be in the Middle East, where the current focus is, but dealing with radical Islam nurtured in the Nihilist void of the European soul. The Doom’s Day scenario is not then a new Caliphate centered on Baghdad, Damascus, Tehran, or Cairo, but one centered in Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, or Madrid.

    [poking the driver: Are we there yet, are we there yet?]

  2. Charles Martel says

    Yes, and the problem with a jihad-crazed caliphate in Paris is that it will be in possession of fusion weapons and long-range delivery systems. Oy.

  3. Owen says

    Charles: If there is a Jihadi Caliphate in Paris and.or London, I think in a lot of ways, the fact they have nukes will be the least of our worries.

    But who knows? Maybe by that time China will have come around, or even the Middle East.

  4. says

    I picked up, from internal and external sources, that the purpose of strength is to protect those that deserve it.
    Mainly, a man’s strength exists to protect not simply women in general, but the important women in his life.
    This is often intentionally instigated in some cultures in order to motivate males to become stronger and more disciplined. Or at least, find a purpose to which they can use their instincts and strength towards.
    This was, as Book wrote before, to convert otherwise destructive male impulses into constructive impulses that benefit society and themselves.
    Personally, I find it offensive that people think they can gain strength by abusing the weak. After all, in my life as I sought greater mental, physical, and spiritual strength, I didn’t achieve what I now have by picking weak people to attack. That would not only be worthless, it would be ridiculous. I would never get better or stronger if I wasn’t taking on people stronger than me. Humans are lazy naturally. If you can win just by doing a low level of effort, most people will stay with that. In order to push humans to the next level, you got to challenge them. You got to present to them a strong opponent, a strong rival, for them to compete with, defeat, and understand.
    I never set my goals of becoming stronger by caring that women are easily overpowered by the average male. I set my goals to the tune of defeating mass murderers or serial killers. People who society recognizes as “dangerous”, to men and women. That was the gold standard for my individual goals. Any average male can overpower most females. That is nothing special to be proud of. It is not true strength nor is it all that useful.
    For some reason, I find a great affinity with the idea that one of a man’s primary responsibilities is to physically protect his woman. And I think a lot of men in America would find affinity with that as well, if it wasn’t for the fact that they are scared of what society would do to them if they said so.
    Islam, by focusing specifically on targeting women, naturally earned my utmost scorn and contempt. A male that can only attack and win against females, is no match for my ideal. Not even close. They would be crushed so fast nobody would even realize what happened. Their physical strength would be of no use against the storm. They might as well be fighting a tornado while flying in the air. As much as Islam overpowers women on an individual case, there exists powers that can overcome Islamic men just as easily on an individual basis, as they overpower women. That is the “power gap” so to speak.

  5. says

    We can always hope the islamics make the mistake Bill Ayers’ friends made when they tried to set up the detonator for a bomb that was to be used against military men and their wives at a social gathering.
    Blow themselves up with their own nukes. Who would pay to see that?

  6. Mike Devx says

    Do y’all really think the coountries of Europe will all lie down and bare their belly and throat for the complete surrender?  I myself think significant opposition will rise as things get inexorably worse.  Not the majority, but you don’t need a majority to fight back.  I think enough within Europe will resist.  But when they wake up in Europe, it gets terribly, terribly bloody.

  7. Charles Martel says

    Europe will fight back in its inimitable way: a bloodbath. It’s what Europeans do.

    They’ll probably succeed. Not to diss the folks who brought us the zero and preserved Plato, but European Muslims are not the brightest bulbs in the human firmament. They can do conventional stuff like rape women and blow up pizza parlors, but they do not know how to fight to the finish. When the Europeans reach their final level of piss-offedness, they’ll do what they always do, which is resort to mass murder and the concentration camp. The Muslim yokels will not know what hit them.

  8. Owen says

    Charles: Wasn’t it the Indians who brought us 0?

    Mike: Frankly I don’t know. It really wouldn’t surprise me. France did not cover itself with glory in WWII, nor Italy, nor Spain. In the recent past, the French at least did get quite irritated when their interests were threatened in Africa. In general, except for the Brits, they have proved rather inept (Kosovo onwards).

    There may be some hopeful signs in Britain, but I haven’t seen a lot of evidence of piss-offedness so far elsewhere. Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

  9. Charles Martel says

    Owen, I was repeating the PC piety about the origin of the zero. The Hindus came up with it and the Muslims passed it west. But the never-ending need to pay homage to Muslims’ easily ruffled sensitivities means we must kiss their butts eternally and say they were The Ones.

  10. says

    Resistance movements in Europe will crop up, but I don’t think they will have the necessary resources to truly be influential. The Nazi party had their own grassroots support and ideological platform that the majority could more or less find good to be worth. So far, it’s a struggle between the Leftist ideology and the Islamic ideology in Europe. Where are the alternatives? Not powerful enough to be felt. The closest is the British National party.
    But again, where are they going to get the resources they need. Resurrect the Irish Republican Army? Where are they going to get the guns and explosives necessary to fight both the Left and Islam. It all, often wise, comes down to logistics. People need determination, will, and ruthlessness, yes, but they also need butter, beans, and bullets.
    NO butter, beans, or bullets, no resistance movement.

  11. Mike Devx says

    It’s fascinating to speculate about exactly what paths opposition might take.  Of course, I’ve always been a fan of alternative history fiction, and such speculation about future paths is similar.
    I suspect the EU is not long for this world; it appears to be under too many economic and political stresses to survive.  (It was poorly designed; it has a lot more in common with our own U.S. under the Articles of Confederation than under our Constitution.)   After the EU collapses, what replaces it?  Another trans-national umbrella organization, or a reversion back to totally independent nations?  In the second case, nationalist movements within the political sphere in dividual countries might arise more easily without suppression.
    It sure is true that right now, traditionalism – including national and cultural pride – is dead in Europe, or at least comatose.  Christian religious worship is hollow and meaningless, replaced by near-meaningless secularized pablum of vague “spirituality” in many cases, or of outright secular hostility in others.
    If all of this were to simply continue, then, yes, Europe as a collection of Western nations disappears.  But events on the ground have a way of surprising everyone, upsetting the apple cart.  Rick Santelli’s rant on CNBC on Feb. 19, 2009 galvanized a low-grade fever of opposition into the Tea Party movement.  It appears that fellow who set himself on fire in Tunisia galvanized these movements and demonstrations across the Middle East and Africa.  One never knows when a catalyst causes the fire to flare or the explosion to occur.

    Whatever happens, it will be years in unfolding, probably decades.

  12. Danny Lemieux says

    I tend to agree that the EU’s days are numbered. Northern Europeans are very unhappy at the prospect of having to subsidize the dysfunctions of their southern EU relatives.
    According to a Wall Street Journal Report, the Prime Minister of the Netherlands is looking to recreate a Hanseatic League for trade of goods and services within Northern Europe. This is great news! The Hanseatic League was a loosely organized free trade association that existed in Northern Europe, centered in the Baltic Rim, for close-on 300 years. It was a huge success. BTW,  “hanse” is a german word for trade association, as in Luft(air) hansa.  Here’s a link, although a subscription may be necessary to access the article:

    I suspect that the “within” EU objective is a ruse and that Rutte is looking ahead to a post-EU world. The Dutch seem to take the lead on a lot of things in Europe.
    Regarding Muslims in Europe: we shouldn’t overlook that many Muslims in Europe have integrated very well. I have met Tunisians and Moroccans in France and Turks in Belgium and Germany who are highly educated, absolutely blend into the social and economic environment, and consider themselves fully participating citizens of their adopted countries. I suspect that most in this group are only nominally Muslim. France, which has a higher Muslim population than most, is a special case, as its relationship and identification with Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria goes back hundreds of years and their peoples are relatively comfortable with each other.
    The ones that are scary represent an uneducated horde that has been imported into Muslim ghettos by the Left. They have no work ethic and contribute little if anything to their societies. This group has no intention of integrating and is militantly anti-West and anti-infidel. These Jihadi radicals manipulate the welfare systems to bring in relatives and friends into their ghettos, of which France has more-than 700. The Jihadis control the economy and security of their enclaves, which police are often reluctant to enter. Much of the economy of these “Sensitive Zones” (as the French call them) is driven by welfare payments, drugs, petty crime and Wahhabi subsidies from Saudi Arabia.
    If there is a bloodbath and ethnic cleansing, it will happen against this group. I really don’t know what will happen. I have to believe that what is happening in N. Africa and the Middle East today will have huge consequences.
    One way the EUros may  decide to act is simply to cut off all state welfare subsidies, impose financial transactional controls this group and one-way bus tickets out of the country. That would take care of a big part of the problem.

  13. says

    Back to the main topic, I can very well understand the power trip the Muslims go through dominating females socially, culturally, legally, and physically.
    Part of the draw of learning H2H is to be able to take out other people in a physical altercation. Thus there is a natural “power trip” going on there. The more scary situations you are supposed to train for, like 1 vs 5 people issues, the more power can be obtained, for an individual’s use (not a group influence issue).
    This is closely related to over confidence on the part of martial artists or ego trips made by people who think they know the goods on violence, but are less informed then they realize. It’s hard to say what is or is not over confidence. meaning, what is or is not proper recognization and bridging of the power gap vs overinflated sense of one’s self worth and capabilities. You would have to interview, verbally and physically, the individual involved to see what’s going on in their head and what kind of skills they have. Demonstration and quizzing, will easily find the gaps in anyone’s knowledge or expertise (or lack of them). If you are trained in basic interrogation protocols.
    However, while I can empathize with the power trip nature that Muslims go through and why they feel drawn to the virgin rewards of whatever Heaven they think they can get by killing women and children. There is something people don’t seem realize here. And it’s a very important realization. Part of the reason why people who can kill with their bare hands are humble, is because they always know there is someone stronger out there. The other reason they are humble is because they are stronger than 95% of the population, so they can afford not to broadcast their strength. It will be recognized just on appearances.
    However, those who can kill with their bare hands using skill and expertise, not strength, is in a different situation. Their humility comes from the fact that they acknowledge their own mortality. That they, if their skill is true, is just as easily killed as anyone else, by the right application of force and targeting. Guns, in the American, serves this purpose more or less. Those armed with guns understand that guns are no respecter of status, wealth, fame, or individual fitness. But I’ll limit my views solely to the issue of H2H for now.
    What people don’t seem to realize easily is that if people allow themselves to be taken over by the power trip, they stop gaining in lethality. They are stuck at a “level”. They don’t improve. The core reason why Islam and Muslims aren’t stronger economically, militarily, and spiritually is because they don’t challenge themselves to do better than they can. Either it’s always the Arabic verse of Inshallah or it’s tribal corruption/parochialism holding them back or something else entirely. It’s always something. If you look at the Europeans, they saw gunpowder and immediately started to weaponize it. The Chinese were tradition bound so they just used it as fireworks and stopped there. No point in advancing, they thought. The old ways were the best ways. Well the thing is, the old ways were old because at one time they were “new” to the people around then.
    I’ve heard some interesting comments that Book relayed here about her Martial Arts school (MMA derived priority) that the people there, while mostly LibProgs, claim to be able to “take care” of criminals or attackers. I have my doubts on that given the kinds of things I heard.
    Islamics can take pride that when they say they will kill you, they mean what they say. Certainly they are better in this respect than the mealy mouthed Leftist alliance members on this planet. However, “better” is not so good when compared against Leftists.
    Before you can defeat enemies, you must first defeat yourself. The ego. The coward. The selfish spoiled brat. Whatever it is in yourself that holds you back, first that one you must defeat. Islamic death squad members, of whatever ideological bent you can ascribe to them, lost to themselves first and foremost. Sure, they can kill defenseless sheep. Up against a trained military force, like the US Marines, they die in the thousands for every 100 US casualty and every 10 US fatality. They get mad at that too. They call upon their god, Allah, to defeat the US Marines, because they are too powerless to do it themselves. So they go and intoxicate themselves on the power trip of beating up women and those weaker than they (gays or whatever is available).
    These are the people who some here in America called “courageous” on 9/11? Give me a break. They cannot even control themselves, their desires and human ego/vulnerabilities/vices. Yet they somehow claim the “right” to control what other people do or say.
    There are many Leftists or apolitical individuals in America that were scared of the ruthlessness of fanatic Islam on 9/11 and in the 2 years afterwards. Then they forgot, covered up the fear as if it never existed. You know what I say? If those individuals had been more capable of taking care of themselves or had been personally trained in the arts of lethal force application, they wouldn’t have been so “afraid” to begin with. Nor would they have dealt with that fear by going into denial or projection measures.
    People who do not know how to use violence, folds when they encounter violence. People who do not believe they have the tool of violence to use to solve their problems, will always look towards the social, the government, as a solution. The more things get crazy and scary, the more the sheep look around for a savior instead of growing fangs and killing the wolves themselves.

  14. says

    Oh ya, short summation. People need to resist targeting women if they want to get stronger. Regardless of how good it makes them feel. Regardless of how much it helps them self-medicate their violent “uncontrollable” frustrations that America is stronger than Allah. Regardless of how much they were abused in the past by their Arabic and Islamic fathers and uncles. If they want true strength, they need to abstain from picking on people weaker than them.
    If they cannot abstain, then they are weak and will be easily dispatched by the strong sooner or later.
    This isn’t just applicable to Islam. This is applicable to Americans as well. You know, the whole “I hate men” vs “I hate women” thing going on. The dating hook up culture amongst teenagers. Pick up Artists and what not. So on and so forth. It can apply to a lot of different things, each in their own fashion.
    I, speaking for myself personally, cannot understand why people are satisfied being dependent on others and being afraid every day of their lives. If they lack the power to secure their own security, then they should go get that power. Why are they sitting around waiting for the government to come help. Why are they sitting around hoping a miracle will happen. Why are they sitting around and venting their frustrations by picking “safe targets” to attack. How the hell do they think their situation is going to get better by picking on “safe targets”? They will never achieve physical security or emotional stability that way.
    In this vein, a lot of black America, at least down here in the South, have similar views to mine. Although they express it politically different.

  15. Charles Martel says

    Owen, I love the Alhambra. In fact, I have a giant soft spot for Islamic architecture. It amazes me what architects and artisans can come up with to feed the eye when their religion forbids depictions of God or humans.


Leave a Reply