You can’t have it both ways.

LAFrance02

We honeymooned in Paris. It was winter time and very cold, but it was still beautiful. When I say cold, I mean it was extremely cold, brutal, so much so that if you couldn’t see the frost glinting on something like the inside of a mine that’s been “salted” with gold dust by a conman, it was because it was already covered in ice. Nearly everywhere we attempted to visit, variations of the same sign were up. Fermées à cause de la glace – closed because of the ice.

It was so bad, my beautiful young bride’s hip started to freeze, and there I was struggling around Île de la Cité to show her Notre Dame with someone on my arm who from a distance could be mistaken for Quasimodo’s sister limping along beside me. Keep going Esmeralda, if we can reach the cathedral, you’ll get some heat, never mind sanctuary.

All in all, it provided a fine excuse for us to stay most of the time safely ensconced in our toasting hot room in scandalous Pigalle, living on food and wine a mere phone call away by room service, while I as a new husband gently kissed better what thankfully turned out to be a transitory but more importantly, not an incapacitating ailment.

We’ve both got fond memories of the city but to be frank with you, it wouldn’t have mattered where we spent that particular week in our lives. Mogadishu on a black hawk down weekend would have been just as much fun, and received just about the same amount of notice from either of us. It’s quite a noisy neighbourhood, isn’t it? Yes, I think they’re letting off fireworks now.

As a city, it’s been massively oversold as a place to visit and usually by people who’ve never actually spent much if any time there. It’s always overwhelmed in the summer by Genghis Khan sized hordes of tourists, and the Parisians who work in the service industry are noted not only for their abruptness but the sheer rapaciousness of their overcharging. Summertime, you’ll do a lot better out in les provinces. If you have to go, I’d advise you to bring a calculator along or do it in the winter season; they’re desperate for some tourist traffic at that time of the year and consequently both the service and the standard of the food improve markedly.

Since I may have inadvertently punted Paris off your bucket list, I have to admit I still sorta like it. All I’m doing here is managing your expectations of the place should you ever decide to visit. It’s a bit like an old and proud grande dame who hasn’t quite realised the city has long ago sailed clean through any fin de siècle indulgent nostalgia and has yet to find the more relaxed end of empire elegance of places like Vienna. You still have a fondness for her and a certain protectiveness of her brittle delusions creeps in, but you always look at her through realistic eyes.

Once you get over the superficial irritations, it does have a few things to recommend it. The city is arranged into twenty arrondissements, each of which is subdivided into four administrative chunks called not surprisingly quartiers. Each of its quartiers has its own flavour, to the extent that there’s a feeling of several villages hung onto the big boulevards like Faubourg or Mich that are the infrastructure of the city. The war zones of the outer suburbs, especially the monstrosities of the 60’s and 70’s, I’d advise you to steer well clear off for a number of reasons. Here, there be dragons …

There’s a determined lack of uniformity about the old higgledy-piggledy quartiers of the city which is all the more impressive since la France is much more into a crippling Gormenghast bureaucracy than other country in Europe. It’s as if each village, especially the medieval ones, are determined to subvert or completely ignore the straightjacket of crippling regulation. It’s cheaper to bribe someone than to hire someone else to find their way through the bureaucratic maze of petty paperwork.

In many cases, compliance with the more exasperating regulations is never checked, since the local administration chooses not to employ anybody to do any such inspections. The locals would be deeply offended by any such imbecility anyway. It’s a workable compromise which I think most reasonable people there would regard as a sensible anti-corruption measure.

It’s a city of diversity. You turn a corner and find yourself in a cobbled square where a bunch of people are playing chess with fierce silent concentration, and though you might stop to watch a game which catches your eye, you eventually tiptoe away to leave them in peace. Another one, people are out in the sunshine enthusiastically painting and living their dream of being another Matisse or Manet but unfortunately without the necessary talent, though the tourists watching their daubings and giving them a few Euros to support them don’t know that. It’s a fair exchange of kind illusions.

Yet another one and it’s a bunch of wannabe kids from around the English-speaking world on the Hemingway homage trail, arguing about whether the Torrents of Spring was a good book or Islands in the Stream was a terrible one. There’s music, food, restaurants, a huge background hubbub of people chattering away like the gregarious bunch of hominids only recently down from the trees that we are, but above all there’s the laughter.

That’s the city they attacked but what they were really after was killing the laughter you’ll find in a city like it. That thumbnail sketch I did of Paris would equally well fit any of the great cities of the West. All those cities became great because they tolerated dissent, diversity and yes, the freedom to poke fun at each other, rather than killing people because you didn’t like what they were saying.

I did an article recently the essence of which is we’re going to have to man up in defence of our cultural values or hand over control to a handful of medieval clerics and their thugs. A few years back, I wrote another article about how multiculturalism would always be a failing policy. The subsequent developments in the years since have given me no cause to change my assessment and indeed if anything, have unfortunately confirmed it.

True democracy is a two-way street. People are entitled to criticise you, even if that’s being done by taking the piss, but you’re just as entitled to do the same back to them. The one thing all dictatorships crack down on most brutally is anyone who makes people laugh at them. If I work hardest on any type of article here, it’s the funny ones because I know they really drive home a message and it always pokes a stick right up the straight-laced opposition. All totalitarians of whatever political stripe have always had the same humour bypass operation. In a sense, which I won’t even attempt to explain, that’s why they always lose in the long run but a clue is humour is humanity.

Having scanned Charlie Hebdo prior to its now tragic notoriety, I wasn’t too impressed with it. That not because I disagreed with whatever point was being made or indeed its nihilistic politics, the articles weren’t any more perceptive than you’d find in the average sixth form college magazine, and when it was trying to be witty and clever, it was just leaden in a juvenile way. Early twenties I already know everything reading material.

What was actually attacked was a culture of establishment hypocrisy, and though I take no satisfaction in saying it, I believe we’ll be the better for it. Given that the overwhelming part of the true democracies are of the Christian persuasion, it was fine to say vile things about the fundamental values of that belief, but was somehow forbidden to criticise a vanishing small minority religion amongst us that relegated women’s rights back five hundred years to chattel status, hacked off bits of their sexual organs and whose extremist element’s avowed aim is to roll back the division of church and state.

These clowns actually think they can establish a Caliphate of the West.

Yeah, well, dream on Mustapha Ali Khan, née Cyril D Ipshit, formerly of Headzupazztown, care of the nearest guru of low self-esteem losers, who assures them that they’re actually better than the steam rising off a freshly circled out spaghetti string of diarrheic dog shit in the gutter. If you’re getting the impression I definitely don’t like heavily armed cowards who murder defenceless people, you’d be on the right track.

The situation we have here is nothing more than a bunch of street corner thugs who think they can terrorise us into conforming to their frankly pathetic and imbecilic agenda. New York, London, Mumbai and Madrid have all had their wake up call from these cowards, and unfortunately last week it was the turn of Paris.

The reaction will be the same.

Once bitten by a vicious dog, you either put it down or you take out your big stick and beat it into submission. The big stick or getting put down are now the only options facing you, but either way the days of cheap hits in France are over for scumbags like you. There’s no hiding place after Charlie Hebdo and murdering shoppers in a supermarket.

The terrorists attacked a city I love but more importantly our way of life. As has already been shown by previous outrages across the civilised world, they won’t succeed with either endeavour. We’ll hunt you down, root you out, two pops centre body mass and a final head tap to finish you off, and you’ll be nothing more than a minor smear in the underpants of history, if that.

©Pointman

Related articles by Pointman:

Live and let live, but in fear.

Why Multiculturalism failed.

The times they are a changing and a righteous kill.

Click for a list of other articles.

 

Comments
14 Responses to “You can’t have it both ways.”
  1. meltemian says:

    Those terrorists have achieved pretty much the opposite of what they intended. In a real ‘Barbra Streisand’ move they have revived the fortunes of a dying magazine and created a resistance movement out of thin air.

  2. Blackswan says:

    Pointman,

    Following the Paris murders, the latest edict from another of Australia’s hate-preachers and self-styled sheiks …..

    “If you want to enjoy ‘freedom of speech’, expect others to exercise ‘freedom of action’.”

    To them, Omar Khayyam had this to say;

    “And do you think that unto such as you
    A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew
    God gave a secret, and denied it me?
    Well, well—what matters it? Believe that, too!”

    ― Omar Khayyam, Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam

    • Old Rooster says:

      What I would remind Muslim clerics (now there’s an oxymoron of sorts) who hold such views is “Ce qui est bon pour l’un devrait l’être pour l’autre.” Surely the time is not long off when radicalised individuals and groups within Non–Islamic society get their Irish up and return serve in similar kind. It is clear that politicians such as Hollande recognise that this is now becoming more probable hence the admonishment to not blame Islam in its entirety. I think their approach is ill advised as it will only goad those predisposed to so act to do so because, rightly or wrongly, they will perceive that their leaders have capitulated to Islam or at the very least are being ineffectual in responding to the threat it poses. If the leaders of Christendom want it to survive in anything approaching its current values and constituent cultures then they will have to embrace Islam with more than touch of tough love. Failure to do so risks their own displacement by those who will, which then exposes us all to the risks of anarchy or mob rule.

  3. Furor Teutonicus says:

    XX These clowns actually think they can establish a Caliphate of the West.XX

    I would not be too sure that they can’t.

    The trouble is, we have taught them “democcracy.” They hate it when it is applied to them, but you can bet your bottom dollar, they will squeeze the last drop of blood out of it when they want to apply it to us.

    In Western countrys, they are, “officialy”, only 4 to 10% of the population (Then why do the entire sum of them insist on using every U-Bahn that I wish to use?) Yet you can not turn on a T.V station, a radio programme, open a newspaper or a web site, without it being full to the gunnels with “Mustaffa Wh’ank and how bad it is for him to be related to spontaniously exploding relatives in a land he hates.”

    Or the likes of the FDJ Tussi, Merkel, saying “Islam gehört Deutschland.” (Islam belongs to Germany.) Members of the dictatorship telling us that “Terrorist acts have nothing to do with Islam.” (If that IS the case, then concentration camps had nothing to do with Germans, as the percentage of people who built and ran them, was lower in the population than the percentage of the suidaephobes supporting Islamic terrorist actions (70 to 80% in France!))

    I had a bet with my Wife one weekend. “I bet you every time we turn the T.V to “BBC world” (World service for T.V), within the first five minutes Mustaffa Wh’ank, or one of his sort will be on, OR the programme will be about camel markets in Marrakhesh, or similar.

    Won hands down.

    That is with them at 4 to 10%

    Just think what it will be like once they reach the 50% mark in the population figures!

    And, considering their birth rate, that will not be SO long off.

    • Old Rooster says:

      You are right to be concerned but I think it is still possible we will win. The key is our leadership must have the will to win. Amazing how convinced they are by the Emperor’s New Clothes of AGCC yet fail to acknowledge the true scale and nature of the threat that Islam, in its entirety, poses to civilisation as we know it.

      Britannia may have demonstrated a possible solution if one digs past last week’s fish and chips wrapping in history—Transportation. If the West were to empty its gaols into those Islam nations which are at the root of our present, and historic, ills then we could not only effect a net saving on the public purse but fight terror with terror at the same time returning many of our imported troublemakers to whence they or their fathers came. Just one or two little variation to the original scheme. No effort will be made to establish colonies in order to avoid the odium, and expense, of being a colonial power. Secondly we will call them asylum seekers in order to secure UN and other do-gooder assistance and support. In time we may just be able to promote free settler schemes whereby climate scientists, human rights lawyers and indeed all manner and condition of oxymoronic vocations are despatched, subsidised if necessary, to help.

      PS Gaols could be reopened as aged care facilities offering higher standards of care with an overall reduction in public expenditure to boot. High security wings would be turned into dementia wards. These very same will no doubt house many former politicians which we will discover to have been impaired by syphilis or heavy metal poisoning or some such.

      • Furor Teutonicus says:

        Old Rooster. You may be right, if it was not for the fact that they breed like rats, and have been taught “democcracy.”

        As SOON as they reach 51% of the population, we have HAD it.

  4. We need to separate the homegrown wack jobs from the foreigners. The aim to do harm is the same but the motivation is different. The foreign wack jobs want to hurt us because they see us as the Great Satan preventing them from achieving their fantasies of world domination. The homegrown ones want to hurt us because they have essentially been isolated and want attention. This applies to “terrorists” as well as sick bastards who gun down cops – just sick little children crying for attention…

  5. Pointman says:

    This piece is about terrorists, not about groups of people you don’t like who’re “breeding like rats”. If you want to have that tenor of discussion, go elsewhere please.

    P

  6. Graeme No.3 says:

    Now that the room has been cleaned up I want to add my little bit.
    The monolithic Moslem tribe doesn’t exist. Islam is split into many sects, Shia and Sunni are just the main divide. There are probably more sects in Islam than in Christianity, because anyone is free (as in Christianity) to start their own.
    So there are Shiite and Sunni moderate, strict and outright looney sects. The last arise because no-one will join a sect proclaiming tolerance and “no need to take the Koran literally”. The various “Islamic” ones all proclaim themselves purer and more correct believers, and that everybody else is inferior.
    If you want an example look at Europe in the 16th & 17th Centuries and the bloodshed then.

    Claims that Moslems should become slack in their beliefs isn’t going to work. Calls for them to condemn the extremists won’t work – firstly it makes them a target and secondly who calls for ‘saints’ to be jailed? That stirs antagonism from the great mass of Moslems, even if they don’t support those self proclaimed ‘saints’.

    Deportation, or the threat of same, won’t be acceptable to many people esp. lawyers and civil rights agitators who are disproportionally listened to by politicians. It took 150 years for the UK to see the end of Irish terrorism (one hopes) and they had a genuine grievance. These people fighting “the crusaders” haven’t, so will eventually disappear. And don’t forget it was a European Kaiser who stirred up anti-crusader sentiment for his own political ends.

    • diogenese2 says:

      PS Graeme ; in respect of Christian sects – a couple of decades ago I took a holiday in Wester Ross, the far west highlands of Scotland and counted 11 separate free-kirks in a community of a few hundred people! Those were not people with which I would care to
      be dogmatic.

  7. diogenese2 says:

    Graeme, you state the truth that is little understood by anybody who does not have any close personal contact with muslims. Islam has no infrastructure or hierarchy. They choose the mosque whose Imam they most prefer. The greatest problem for islamists is that they must first subdue their errant brothers hence the huge mountain of dead muslims produced by the current manifestations of the green revolution. The idea that they can unite to “subdue” our indigenous population is sheer fantasy. Many that I know in the UK came to escape the stultifying petty social control of their local “traditions” (some of which were African!), only to find the personal freedom of our society undermines the “traditions” they would wish to maintain within their families. The young people are thus tempted by the freedom that they see exercised by their non-muslim peers and (usually) desire it (especially the females!). This is one, unacknowledged, factor in the radicalisation of young male muslims in this country (the UK and , I suppose, in France). They are fighting to establish a conceived way of life that has, de facto, been abandoned by their parents most of whom just want to live undisturbed.
    Islam only recognises the leadership of the sword. That is why – in the modern world – it has no chance at all of domination.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: