Charlie Hebdo, Terrorism, and Western Unity

By Nicholas Stix

 

In a microcosm of the West's approach to its enemies, the policeman stationed in the office of Charlie Hebdo magazine on January 7 was unarmed. And so he was slaughtered by Moslem brothers Chérif and Saïd Kouachi, along with 10 of the people he was supposed to protect, while the Kouachis wounded another 11.

 

The Islamic terrorist mass murderers, if you'll pardon the redundancy, leisurely went about their business. Afterwards, they had time outside to wound a second policeman, chase him down, and slaughter him with their Kalashnikovs, as he begged for his life. As some observers noted, here was where the words, "Hands up, don't shoot" actually belonged, not at the Ferguson riots.

 

The Kouachis had so much time because, while they had better arms than the average soldier, the defenders of the West had none. Three policemen responded to the initial report of the shooting on their bicycles, before remembering, 'Hey, we don't have any guns!,' and prudently fleeing with their tails between their legs.

 

The politically correct of all parties emphasized that the two dead cops were Arab Moslems, as if this were a sign of progress. (The third dead cop was a black African woman, shot dead on January 8 by the brothers' accomplice, Amedy Coulibaly).

 

I saw things a little differently: The French government was sending unarmed boys and girls to fight armed-to-the-teeth men, at the same time it was racially and sexually purging the Parisian gendarmerie of Frenchmen.

 

It sounded just like home. The West's enemies are legion, as its defenders dwindle and are increasingly disarmed.

 

This was not some surprise attack. Moslems had already firebombed the office in 2011, and made death threats since.

 

Some un-pc commentators (not MSM, obviously) noted that the staffers were unarmed, due to French gun control. However, gun control was irrelevant. The pc staffers didn't believe in self-defense and wouldn't have armed themselves, if it were legal.

 

How pc? One of the victims had just published a cartoon celebrating the racist assassination of New York City police officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, as "Reprisals for the assassination of two American blacks" (Mike Brown and Eric Garner).

 

Immediately after the first slaughter, an artist drew a widely circulated cartoon, depicting the pen as mightier than the sword. I can imagine Moslems responding to that by hammily falling down in front of each other: 'Oh, I'm dying, Mohammed, an infidel just stabbed me … with his pen!'

 

In France, cute white girls who, at the present rate will be wearing burkas in a few years, carried signs saying "Je suis Charlie," "I am Charlie," and attended candlelight vigils, defending France's non-existent tradition of liberty.

 

Candlelight vigils are whites' way of publicly expressing their impotence.

 

New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote, "I am Not Charlie," as criticism of the Americans who lightly said "I am Charlie," while silencing political opponents on university campuses and elsewhere.

 

Brooks published his column in a communist newspaper, whose censors maintain an Enemies' List of people (including yours truly), who are blocked from being published on their letters page, or even on their comment threads. On the rigged comment thread, the censors promoted leftists who asserted that Brooks' criticism was specious, because they were only silencing people and not murdering them, as if leftists didn't support murdering their enemies.

 

Two days after the first slaughter, the Kouachis' accomplice, Amedy Coulibaly, invaded a Kosher supermarket in Paris' Jewish Quarter, and slaughtered four Jewish hostages. Finally showing some will, a police SWAT team killed Coulibaly.

 

Hollande responded to the two slaughters with craven, politically correct lies, dhimmi appeasement, and anti-Semitism. He asserted that the Charlie Hebdo massacre had "nothing to do with the Muslim religion," and that the Kosher supermarket massacre had nothing to with anti-Semitism.

 

Hollande then called for a January 11 "unity" march against "terrorism," but the "unity" was as fake as the "terrorism." It was a parade displaying the unity of both impotent (Hollande, Merkel) and murderous (Abbas) political correctness, Elois and Morlocks… against the French people. Hollande invited every pc party leader in France and abroad, such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is waging her own lonely struggle on behalf of Islam, the German Left, and the EU to destroy the German people.

 

What sort of man is Francois Hollande. He supports fake "gay" marriage, while opposing the real thing. It is no compliment to say that he is not a hypocrite. There is a tradition of French upper-class hypocrisy— which the Frenchman de La Rochefoucauld fittingly called "the homage vice pays to virtue"—that was morally superior to what he is enshrining. The tradition was that a man has a wife and a mistress. One respects the wife, by taking her to all official functions, weddings, and such, and taking the mistress, say, to the opera. Hollande instead has mistresses and no wife, which defeats the purpose of having a mistress, and has so far humiliated one mistress and caused protocol chaos, by publicly throwing her aside for another. The chaos is because under Hollande's new dispensation, his mistress du jour is referred to as the first "lady."

 

Hollande proudly refused to invite the one French political leader, Marine Le Pen, who has named "Islamism" as the problem, and taken a stand in support of the one policy with a chance at ending the terrorism—ending the EU's anti-security open borders dogma, and mass immigration into France—and who has more Frenchmen behind her than he does. (Le Pen's criticisms, including maintaining the false distinction between "Islamism" and "Islam," sound muted to this observer's ears.) A real French patriot, Brigitte Bardot, has lauded Le Pen as "the Joan of Arc of the 21st century," capable of saving France. [Brigitte Bardot calls Marine Le Pen 'modern Joan of Arc' by David Chazan, Telegraph, 22 August 2014.]

 

Hollande is much more popular, though, among the racist (anti-white), anti-Western managerial elite of editors dominating newsrooms in France and elsewhere, and apparatchiki in the French ministries, European Parliament, and NGOs. The terrorist vote is his most loyal voting bloc—the Moslems slaughtering leftwing artists and Jews are "his people."

 

Hollande also pointedly told the leader of the world's only Jewish state, Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, who also happens to be the only Western leader who actually leads his nation on behalf of its historic people, that Netanyahu was unwelcome at the march.

 

Netanyahu initially agreed to stay away, but changed his mind, and when ordered to remain in the second row, pushed his way to the front row. How about that pushy Jew!

 

Hollande responded by inviting genocidal anti-Semite and supporter of Moslem terrorism Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, to attend, and by walking off the podium, as Netanyahu began his speech.

 

Hollande invited the world's staunchest and most powerful supporter of Moslem and Third World, non-white terrorism, Barack Obama. Obama who, according to Islamic law is a Moslem, refused to attend, presumably out of solidarity with the terrorists, but also because of the urgent business of watching two NFL playoff games that day.

 

(After leftists tweeted the ridiculous claim that Obama had stayed away out of security concerns, his staffers mimicked the assertion. If anyone was in danger, it was Netanyahu, not Obama.)

 

Thus, one could be forgiven for concluding that Hollande intended the march as an expression of disunity, and in support of Moslem terrorism.

 

Nevertheless, 3.7 million French citizens marched that day, over one million in Paris alone. I am quite sure that they were not marching in order to lie about the massacres, or to appease Moslems.

 

Germany. For weeks, tens of thousands of Germans at a time have been rallying for Germany, and against Islam in German cities and now beyond Germany, under the banner of PEGIDA: "Patriotische Europäer gegen die Islamisierung des Abendlandes" ("Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the Occident"). On January 13, pc ("mainstream") German political leaders responded by rallying in support of Moslems.

 

The non-Moslem pols' true motivation was not their love of Moslems, but their hatred for ordinary, patriotic Germans. This hatred, by each nation's elite, of the white founding people, is the ruling principle of all Western political life. In each country, the elites run a top-bottom coalition of rich whites and poor non-whites, who have forged a counter-people, in order to destroy the real people.

 

In America, while we certainly continue to contend with Moslem terrorism, our biggest terrorism problem, with daily attacks nationwide, consists of American-born blacks, who have been waging a one-sided race war on whites for over 50 years. Hispanics now comprise a second threat, followed by the much less numerous Moslems.

 

The leading "black" terrorist has illegally occupied the White House now for six years, and has worked ever more aggressively, in recent years, to disarm white (and white-enough) police and civilians alike in mortal confrontations with domestic terrorists. As with Hollande, Obama's base and the terrorist threat to America are one and the same, only our impotent appeasers are called "Republicans."

 

The unity of the West consists not of opposition to Islamic, black, or reconquista terror, but in the campaign of the ruling elite and its lumpen non-white allies to destroy each nation's white historic people.