234 thoughts on “9 Measures To Prevent Future Terrorist Attacks”

1. And most importantly, STOP OVERTHROWING MIDDLE EASTERN GOVERNMENTS. I really do not care if the government are dictatorial or authoritarian, as someone who grew up in the Middle East, I can say for a fact that such governments are often the only thing keeping radicalism at bay. In fact, most of the Muslim friends I made there always preferred countries with a strong government because it kept the radicals in jail while in a democracy, the religious extremists would often always gain power. (eg: Egypt, Libya, Iraq etc.)

   1. And to do this, necons must be purged and exiled from policy positions and intelligence agencies. They are cancer.

      1. Would Trump really make that happen. He might be more isolationist but what of all those thinktanks pushing for war / ‘democracy’ (too often the same thing)?

         1. Who knows what he can really do behind the scenes, but there’s a better chance he’ll be vocal about it than Killary.

         2. He is a wildcard for sure, but he has hammered the Iraq invasion for years, which was the apex of neocon influence. The neocons are pushing for a fight with Russia via Ukraine which Trump doesn’t want. There are a litany of things he has said that refute the Bush/Obama/Clinton foreign policy, which is saturated with neocon influence. His press conference earlier this week was a solid 10/10 and he addresses the media whining about him not consulting “advisors” who have been the architects of the last 15 years of failure. Worth the watch in its entirety.

         3. He’s definitely worth a chance. Hillary made her pact with the devil a long time ago and will continue down the same path

         4. He has an interesting track record, and it’s fantastic if he’s really prepared to stand up to the neo-con war mongers. The MSM and Clinton are now trying to pass him off as someone who’s in Putin’s pocket simply because he’s said he can work with Putin and didn’t condemn those claimed Russian email hacks, yet the other way of looking at this is the whole world can pull back from the brink of war, or at least endless bloody conflicts that serve nobody but those self-same corrupt neo-con elites, not to mention the Clinton and Bush dynasties. I doubt he’s capable of any kind of root and branch clean-out: he is after all part of the elite himself, but that’s all for the better to the extent that if he’s serious about what he’s saying he might just be able to broker a real world solution to all of this madness

         5. but is he a true elite himself? Hill has gotten over 120 mil in donations from hedge funds; Donald? less than 20,000. You read that correctly: less than 20,000 dollars

         6. I truly hope he’s a WYSIWYG kind of guy. Sometimes though the elites want us to choose our poison. That way they can say ‘this is what you asked for’. They’ve already (in a non-conspiratorial sense) done it with the Brexit to some extent.
            I’m holding out for Trump (I can’t vote for him) because he’s the freshest breath of air we’ve had for a long time. But beyond that it doesn’t do to over-commit. If he gets in he has to follow through

         7. I don’t think the lack of donations (while interesting) is proof that he is not an elitist.
            Think of it this way: What does the Trump campaign need money for? Seriously. So he can get on TV and tell people Hillary sucks and he will make America great again? A) Most people know that by now and B) He can get that for free by just going on tv and the news media will show up and broadcast it.
            Hillary, on the other hand, needs money, needs to work on the “Get Out The Vote Ground Game”, making sure churches and minorities, and the poor and the young and all these unreliable groups turn out. She needs to point out the negatives of a Trump presidency. She needs to reverse her nagative image (hehe).
            Trump really can’t win over that many more people to his side through his message. He doesn’t really have a platform. If you don’t like him by now, because of his pro-America anti-globalist anti-pc blustering, I don’t know what he could say or do in a commercial to convince you. Maybe he could come up with some actual policies and talk about that but I don’t see that happening.
            On top of all that, Trump is a billionaire and has been mostly self funding his campaign now. So to summarize, he doesn’t need money the way Hillary desperately does. Now, what about the question of his elitism? It’s a tossup. I tend to agree with those who say anyone who becomes a billionaire and is in the top 0.1% and does international real estate deals and has been to Bohemian Grove is part of the elite.
            They just don’t let ordinary people do what Trump has done. I could be wrong, but certainly lack of donations is not sufficient evidence that Trump’s not a member.

         8. I tend to agree with those who say that JFK was the last independent, true leader, and that a coup happened in 1963, and that America is now run by an oligarchy.

         9. you know if you go deep into the (somewhat silly) conspiracy literature they say the Kennedy’s are of the satanist bloodlines or something, but JFK usually gets a kind of dispensation for being independent minded, and being prepared to defy the banks (well start printing greenbacks independently of the fed or somethign like that). I’m not sure I believe in the ZOG, but it’s pretty clear that US presidents (or any other western leaders) can’t go too far off their expected course without suffering some consequences. If you take things back to the creation of the fed, Woodrow Wilson was compromised and after him Roosevelt I think. I don’t like to take too strong a position on things that ultimately can never be more than speculative, but yes, any kind of scepticism in this regard means not swallowing hole the idea that Trump or even Putin are not to some extent beholden to powerful forces. Given the nature of global banks, corporations, and other powerful interests that’s to be expected I suppose

         10. <<o. ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::::!!bt706p:….,..

         11. I tend to believe the Bill Hicks story of how they are taken down and shown a film of the JFK assassination. When Jesse Ventura was elected governor, a similar thing happened to him, where he was called into a room full of spooks and they wanted to know how the hell a non-Republicrat won.
             

         12. in some shape or form I imagine that’s pretty much the case. It’s definitely more than knowing on which side your bread is buttered. It’s about knowing that there will be consequences to not toeing the line. I actually hadn’t heard that Bill Hicks routine

      2. (((Neocons)))

   2. Less than 10% of Islamic invaders are from war torn lands.
      It’s a popular myth you espouse. They are economic rapefugees being brought in by Soros and Barbara Spectre.
      But I’d agree that wars for Israel are not in our interests…

   3. This.

   4. Notice how the only stable Middle Eastern states are monarchies, with the only exception being Iran, which is also authoritarian.

      1. I would put that another way. The stable ones are the ones that follow their master’s bidding.

      2. Are they so great though? In Qatar, you pay 1000 EUR for parking in the wrong place.

         1. I’m not saying I would want to live there, it seems like it would be hell for anyone who is not a member of the Arab royalty. I’m saying that only the monarchies can keep stability and order, while the formally democratic states (Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc) are all Islamist-controlled hellholes embroiled in internal conflicts.

   5. Arabs intrinsically respect one thing only: FORCE. This is what the British came to understand during the days of the Empire. They take diplomacy and negotiations as signs of weakness and effeminacy in their opponents.
      I agree, we’ve no business in that region and our institutions and customs including democracy are completely alien to their outlook. The sickening combination of western liberalism that tries to blame us for their failures and our own narrow self interest in the affairs of their States regarding Oil has produced a monstrosity like a hydra with a thousand disembodied heads that’s coming our way.

      1. Yeah, just look at them. Many of them run around fucking angry all the time.

      2. What are you talking about? The things that will sort out Afghanistan and the Greater Levant are feminism, transgender rights, gay rights, and debt-based securitization of everything! That’s freedom baby, yeah…

   6. THIS makes sense….we SHOULD HAVE left Saddam in power.

   7. Agreed. But it’s because of the influence of cliques of special-interest groups that they are doing that: Zionist neocons, Christian pro-Israel groups, Israeli lobbies, big oil companies, as well as Saudi and Gulf Arab money influences. Been that way for a long time.

      1. Iraqis oil is pumped to Haifa Israel. That invasion was planned by them decades ago

   8. Don’t forget the mantra, SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING
      Oh wait, I guess that really doesn’t work after all, ahem, FBI.

      1. Yeahhhh.. How’d that work out for Snowden?

         1. Snowden right now is a dark horse, I don’t believe that he is not an agent at the moment.
            The Russians are probably or almost for sure paying him right now, for something. And we don’t know what.
            The information he dumped initially would likely be the genuine stuff, but anything past landing in Moscow I don’t think we can see as honest, even if it is true.

   9. “Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said yesterday that Iran, Libya and Syria should be stripped of weapons of mass destruction after Iraq. “These are irresponsible states, which must be disarmed of weapons mass destruction, and a successful American move in Iraq as a model will make that easier to achieve,” Sharon said to a visiting delegation of American congressmen.
      Sharon told the congressmen that Israel was not involved in the war with Iraq “but the American action is of vital importance.”
      – Feb 18 2003
      http://www.haaretz.com/sharon-says-u-s-should-also-disarm-iran-libya-and-syria-1.18707

   10. Indeed. These countries can’t function as democracy, they need a strong authoritan ruler.

2. So now we are calling for widespread reductions of freedoms for the white western man?
   The French National Guard is being formed which will serve as a military police force. Similar measures have already been abused in the past, cracking down on French citizens, such as in November when French environmentalists were placed under house arrest during the Paris climate summit in November, and in May when protestors were banned from demonstrating against controversial labor reforms by the French government.
   An end to the Schengen agreement would put checkpoints and across every nation in Europe. It would be the equivalent of building walls around every state in the US, and dealing with bureaucrats wanting a toll and to know “where ya headed?” every time you crossed state lines. Taxes and restrictions on goods being shipped across these same lines would soon follow.
   The west for years has been a place where the people are free, safe, and peaceful, and typically third world commonalities like black masked troops with assault rifles roaming the streets was not only absent, but illegal (as in the US, due to the Posse Comitatus Act, established in the 1800s and repealed in the W administration).
   However, what we are seeing in France is citizens now submitting to random checks of their bags, body pat downs, and metal detectors as they enter public buildings. And the author of this article is implying that this is a *good* thing.
   Consider whether the globalist plan all along wasn’t to destroy the notions of freedom, individualism, and creativity that the west excels at. Consider whether the globalists do not leap for joy when they can convert nationalist western Christians into cheerleaders for their cause. And then realize you are being used as a pawn in their plan.
   Consider that the Mujahadeen was created by the west, as was Al Q, as was Is-is. Consider that there is ample evidence through documents like Operation Northwoods that western governments will gladly sacrifice the lives of a few innocents as long as it increases their power and furthers their goals.
   Consider that the actual threat of terrorism is low, but it is causing huge changes in the lives of westerners and permanent restrictions on their freedoms, through laws like the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc. ending bank secrecy laws, providing tracking and surveillance of all citizens, and changing the very desire of western peoples from demanding a “live free or die” society to begging to be chained.
   The answer to saving the west is not to destroy what the west is.
   https://www.rt.com/op-edge/352041-france-militarized-dystopia-state/

   1. I still remember when the War on Terror was declared about fifteen years ago. My fellow soldiers at the time were gung-ho about it and the first thing I thought was, “Yeah, because the War on Drugs has worked so well, right?”
      I’ve noticed I’m not the only one who sees it as just another excuse to reduce individual liberties and expand power of the state.

      1. Its tough to wage war on a subjective concept.

         1. Which is what many a person finds difficult to understand.

         2. It is hard to understand why something nonsensical does not make sense – when you did not understand how it DOES in the first place.

         3. I laugh at the way they use the term now. Whenever something bad happens, there is a rush by the authorities to “determine whether he was a terrorist” whatever the hell that means. I read it within the last 24 hours, I forget the story, but a bad guy did something somewhere, and the media reported “Authorities quickly confirmed that this was not a terrorist act.” To me, it’s just code for what the guy’s skin color was.
            Like, what the fuck does that even mean?! If someone hits me across the head with a board and grabs my wallet, I’m terrorized if they were brown and call their God Allah but I’m not if they call him Yahweh? It’s such bullshit.
            To quote our illustrious presidential nominee “What difference does it make anyway?” Calling the Orlando night club shooter a terrorist has zero impact on what he did or why, and is totally meaningless.

         4. It’s basic Western philosophy:
            – Is it a “terrorist”?
            – Is it “good”?
            – Is it “rape”?
            We are obsessed with labels that change nothing about what really happened.

         5. So true. Labeling something is THE most important thing in our society.
            What is the actual purpose or point of creating the 58th gender term? There isn’t one.

         6. There is a huge difference between a random theif stealing a wallet, and a religion advancing its ideology through acts of terrorism.

         7. “Authorities recently confirmed that the presence of the bright yellow orb in the sky was not a sunrise event.”
            If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I don’t care who calls it a gorilla.

         8. How ideological are most of these guys they call “terrorists”? Even the 911 guys were supposedly in strip clubs and drinking alcohol prior to doing whatever they did…

         9. That’s exactly why they did it. They felt guilty and saw that the only way to save themselves was by becoming martyrs.
            All this is outlined in the Quran. Islam truly is a devious system that knows how to control people.

         10. I know it’s odd. I guess it serves the government’s propaganda purposes.

      2. The war of drugs hasnt been even a real war one doesnt call mass incarceration war. Only duterte actually waged a real war on drugs.

         1. You also don’t typically work for the opposite side in a war (though considering the myriad of ways that we support ISIS, the CIA trafficking drugs isn’t that bad.)

   2. Military is reactionary in France anyway. It will not deter anything.
      A weak and ineffective police force is a major steeping stone in the progression of an insurgency.
      Once we see the specific targeting of police, low level government officials to include politicians even mailmen then France will officially have an insurgency.

   3. excellent comment

   4. there is nothing wrong with a pogrom when the pogrom is on your side. I have absolutely no problem with roaming masked death squads executing people in the road, as long as it is at the behest of a nationalistic nation based on Christendom and traditional values. they are just tools. that being said, The US government is a zionist monster advocating for the destruction of the white race.

      1. sorry but that’s dumb. As soon as you admit the principle, then you’re more likely to be the victim of than a beneficiary of such a policy, particularly given the current constitution of power in the world.
         As someone has pointed out below middle-eastern dictatorships have often been a force for stability in those countries. That reflects the political culture of those countries, which is often profoundly antagonistic towards democracy in the western tradition.
         But tell me do you really want death squads on the streets of the US or europe?

         1. who the fuck cares whats happening in fuckistan if there are no problems here? death squads killing drug pushers, addicts, pedophiles, gang members and welfare queens are fine with me. You sound like a student of globalist thinking. I couldnt care less what those countries do or are doing as long as they are barred from stepping foot on civilized soil. if they want to be civilized than its fine. The US needs to utterly annihilate a country if they bomb it, this pussyfooting only creates more problems. Salt the earth and demote anyone who brings up “collateral damage”

         2. neo-cons have murdered their way through half the middle east, so its pretty clear that they at least care about what’s happening in fuckistan. But you also miss my point, which is that Assad, Saddam etc were providing stability, the kind of stability that should in theory enable countries like the US and the EU states to stay clear of inveiglement in ponitless conflict. You seem to believe that the US should destroy every country that it designates an enemy, including presumably countries that haven’t even shown any kind of actual let alone imminent threat. I can only you assume you’re a neo-con yourself because obliterating countries for sport, or salting the earth as you mention it is simply insane psychopathy. Given that the US is likely to become progressively less able to maintain its global hegemony this might be a good time to rethink bezerking as the basis for geopolitical strategy

   5. In all these attacks, false flags in my opinion, ISIS is not the author. They just use it as propaganda. The Islamic State is currently underfunded due to the bombing of their trucks transporting petroleum (mobile pipeline) by the Russians. For that reason they are selling gold. They have no ability to organize any attack outside its borders increasingly reduced. War is big business and the Western powers are head on it. French Elite is using these attacks as a method of social control, while letting in Muslims indiscriminately and put in social security, develop a campaign against Islam. This is creating division, European birth rate plummets and capitalism needs consumers, even if they have to live subsidized. In Latin America we are living the same hysteria now, even without attacks, it is an excuse for more monitoring and limitation of freedoms. The background is a gigantic global economic crisis, once again France is the example with the massive workers’ mobilizations.

      1. IS-IS is not an actual group. It is a label given to people who behave a certain way, like liberal, or misogynist, or freedom fighter.
         Now, lately, it has organized to some itself, but this was ENTIRELY organic. It was never a real organization until the west proclaimed it as such. Then people whose parents had been droned in a wedding party said, well, if that’s who is fighting Murica, then that’s what I want to be. And they picked up the mantle of the flag that the western media showed them, and said now I’m a member of IS-IS, and so did their friends, and eventually they made the group real. But it is still not an organized, structured entity.

         1. Interesting. Any source on that?

         2. I’m not sure I can point you to any single article. One has to observe these things as they happen, and pick up on bits and pieces. For example, suddenly one day, when this new group NO ONE had ever heard of before, was taking over Iraq, and CNN reported on it as if it was a completely unsurprising thing, like in Orwell’s 1984 where Big Brother switches between saying “We’ve always been at war with Eurasia” to “We’ve always been at war with Eastasia” and no one bats an eye.
            The next time there is a new group or leader or something you have never heard of and the media doesn’t provide a background story, be very suspicious.
            The Power of Nightmares BBC special (Relampago did an article on it) goes into detail about how Al Q was not a real organization, and that famous video of Binn Laden being interviewed by CNN, he actually hired his group of AK47 toting “followers” to be in his posse for the day, because he didn’t control so much as a local gang. It was all bullshit.
            Anyway, one must really suspend common sense in order to believe any of the IS-IS stuff. First they dress in all black (Who wears black in the middle of the desert–no one, anywhere), and they travel in these huge caravans of white Toyota trucks that even the North Korean airforce would have no trouble taking out, as they stand out like a sore thumb driving through the desert sand.
            Then there is the Hollywood-level production videos, and the weird killing videos they release, that appear very western. And a modern, functional army like the US supposedly has doesn’t let thousands of Humvees, bombs, tanks, etc. fall into the hands of its enemies. And yet that’s exactly what happened with IS-IS.
            All of that is just circumstantial–it doesn’t prove anything other than it’s not believable that such a group behaves in such a way. Otherwise I would say just search the web for the origins of these groups and you’ll find articles.. Or look for a journalist you can trust like Seymore Hersh.
            http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

         3. Very interesting, thanks. Especially that first part about “We have always been at war with…” Indeed a weird world we live in. Good observation.

         4. And I can’t recommend The Power of Nightmares enough. It really explains how governments use fear to increase their power and control their populations. You can extrapolate the model throughout history.

      2. They do have the bataclan network, but the other cases are probably the results of their preaching more than anything else.

   6. Good post, however you are gravely mistaken in one respect.
      Europe MUST end schengen and enforce its borders, and it is in NO way even remotely similar to having border checks between states in the US.
      European nations are not states of a nation, nor will they ever be. The whole experiment is part of the hammer being used to smash European culture and heritage.
      Nations must have their right and power to self regulation, and it begins with border controls as it stands now.
      Some European countries have had sizable Muslim populations and diverse groups for centuries while others have remained almost completely mono ethnic until very recently.
      The differences are far too large to ever be tolerated or compatible with open borders.

      1. Can you elaborate on why American states are dramatically different from European ones?

         1. I’d say the cultural differences are vastly more exaggerated than among the US states. Language barriers, too. It’s not like there is one general language everyone in Europe speaks.

         2. Language, ethnic identity, culture, customs etc. differences exist between states as well, I’m not denying that, but nothing of the scale we have in Europe.
            History plays a big part in the European differences being so large, people still think of old wars from 500yrs ago and further. And they still matter to people.
            The only real divergence of opinion in the US that I’m aware of was the civil war.

         3. Yeah, the language, I agree. But Europe shares hundreds, thousands of years of history of a shared culture, a shared religion, and shared values.
            I have traveled to perhaps 40 of the 50 states, and there are ENORMOUS differences between different regions. A guy in Maine has far more in common with a guy across the border in Canada than he does a redneck in Alabama.
            California is completely different in so many ways than anything anywhere else. It has its own industry, its own culture (it was gay and flaming before it was cool), Hollywood, grows most of the food for the rest of the nation, and has a far different lifestyle.
            Why should an Austrian have to go through a checkpoint to visit a German when a Miami company can freely ship products to atheist hippie Seattle or Spanish speaking TexMex Houston or Jewish NYC?
            The model of the European states to me is quite similar to the 50 US states, and arguing for one system in the US and another in Europe is silly. Of course there are differences. There are always differences. Everywhere.

         4. There you are wrong. European nations are much older than the U.S. Moreover they are nations with a notion of themselves why America…let’s just say it’s still a proposition. But I get your point, border controls would make the life harder to everyone and bring back control to bureaucrats at the borders.
            However the first thing a government (an entity created with the purpose of protecting the nation from external threats…read hostile foreigners) has to do is to control the borders and inbound flows if it wants to protect its citizens, ensure their safety and perform the only task that justifies its existences besides infrastructure construction and maintenance. Should the government fail at this task, it should be disbanded.

         5. Germany was formed as a single state in 1871. The Risorgimento was the political and social process that unified different states of the Italian peninsula into the single nation of Italy. It is difficult to pin down exact dates for the beginning and end of Italian reunification, but most scholars agree that it began with the end of Napoleonic rule and the Congress of Vienna in 1815, and approximately ended with the Franco-Prussian War in 1871, though the last “città irredente” did not join the Kingdom of Italy until the Italian victory in World War I.
            So tell me again how the nations of Europe all have longer histories than the US of A. A lot of these European nations barely have a sense of themselves even today. Portions of several of these countries are actively trying to break away from the relatively recent unifications. Think the Basques, the Catalonians, some parts of south western France, and Scotland.

         6. No, the point is they do not have a shared history other than wars, there is no shared culture or shared values either, there, my friend, you are mistaken.
            I grew up in both north and south Europe, and there is virtually zero connection between the cultures. There isn’t even a point where they can meet and exchange because their ideas of that are so fundamentally different.
            Europe isn’t and can’t be a United States of Europe

         7. I mean no offense but you are really wrong. A nation!=country/State-Government. A nation is a group of people that might belong even to different races (see Hispanic America or the Jews) but share common ancestors, common language, common history, common cultural patterns and a religion and it time if the nation started as a group of different ethnicities, they will form one. As Jews and other groups have shown not even a piece of land, let alone a formal and recognized state or a Govt are necessary for the existence of a nation.
            The German Nation (das Volk) has almost 2000 years of existence and Charlemagne created France at the same time it officialized the existence of a German Land. The German Nation existed long before Bismark and Kaiser Wilhelm. England existed since the early middle ages. Spain existed long before an Englishman thought of setting foot on America. If anything, what we are witnessing now are the corrosive effects of globalism and the fact that once Christianity died in Europe, one of the columns that supported the very existence of those nations went away, weakening the countries to the very core.
            However no one can talk about an “American Nation” seriously when the differences between the races, let alone the very whites (the “core” of the American State) are not only so great but each group is hostile to one another. Europe is decadent but America lacks a sense of itself as a nation. Otherwise jus soli wouldn’t be the law of the land there.

      2. I agree. Poland, for instance is far, far different from Germany in terms of culture, language and borders….during the war the Germans considered Poles “sub-human”…Countries are NOT states….no way.

         1. The distinction between Eastern Europe and Western Europe is more than just geographical.

   7. Lets also consider this. French casualties due to preventable terrorism number in the low hundreds this year. On average, 283,000 people die each year in France from the Top Ten List of preventable illnesses. Where is the panic on that? Why aren’t we forcing people to exercise and eat healthy?
      Next to that, terrorism is a tiny, tiny problem blown out of proportion by the State, which in fact, is the ultimate cause of terrorism.

      1. It’s your right if you want to kill yourself. It’s the role of the government to shield from external threats.

         1. I think its the role of the government to shut the fuck up and get out of the way. I’ll deal with any “external threats” that come my way.
            Welcome back Clark.

         2. The state could take a unilateral action like lowering the speed limit 5 MPH which would save orders of magnitude more lives by reducing traffic deaths at the expense of travel time, than all the anti-terror actions worldwide combined. If they are really looking out for the safety and welfare of the citizenry, they are doing a terrible job at it.

         3. Yeah, pave my roads, and staff my libraries. I’ll handle the rest myself, thank you very much.

         4. You don’t think that’s maybe so thing better addressed as a group ? Yeah, it’s maybe not as “external” as internal at this point.

         5. Speed bumps don’t instigate wars.
            There’s a fine balance between public sector and social engineering.

         6. Hehe thanks Bob.
            My life has been a combination of those two Rhianna songs “Work work work work work” + “Bitch Betta have my money”.
            I’m convinced she wrote those songs about a shitty manager at a retail store.

         7. And you’ll deal with them personally? Maybe if you live out in the country.

         8. What does where I live have to do with it? Those guys did a pretty good job with the terrorist on the train.

         9. Bitch Better Have My Money is the title of an old rap song by AMG. Check it out. It’s hilarious.

         10. Definitely as a group, just not the government or the cops. Those people don’t care about you.

      2. Yeah, that’s actually a great argument. And take the people who die from bad conditions in hospitals, contracting MRSA and stuff like that.
         That handful of dead through terrorists? Oh, come on!

      3. I would argue that predictability and the potential threat to the host civilization is the distinction. Disease ? Pretty stable and not really a threat per se. It’s definitely something g that would make it better, by an a sense of major effort to counteract that won’t really threaten to end us. Terrorism in the other hand is actually a symptom that it’s far too late already. The violence of trrorism is a tiny tiny facet of a massive massive problem.

         1. Your chance of dying from terrorism is virtually nil. But you want to focus on that rather than stuff that is virtually guaranteed to kill you and is within your gift to prevent?

         2. Tell that to the Priest who had his throat slit.
            I like your utopian fantasy of libertarian individualism but, it is not practical. Society needs rules and the enforcement of these rules.

         3. The only utopia here is the stifling socialist one in which you envisage that all crime can be prevented if only we have the right people in charge. In fact, your approach will actually lead to more priests getting killed as you create an oppressive false sense of security.

            Society needs rules and the enforcement of these rules

            Straw man. Nobody said otherwise.

   8. Fully agree, this article sends shivers down my spine.
      “It would be the equivalent of building walls around every state in the US, and dealing with bureaucrats wanting a toll and to know “where ya headed?” every time you crossed state lines.”
      I am from Munich and went searching for the shooter. This is EXACTLY what went through my head. Everything was full of cops. I sensed that I had a greater chance of being shot by a cop for thinking I was the shooter than to be shot by the shooter himself. Everything felt like a fucking warzone. Not a good feeling at all. And it dawned on me that all you need to create a police state is a little puny shooting with a handful of dead. Hell, you don’t even have to have a real shooting. You could easily fake it.

      1. When they see that you shaved your eyebrows can you blame them? 😉

         1. Heh. They have grown back already.

      2. Exactly, the problem is that it was conducted crudely. A good counter-terrorism operation should be quiet, subtle, and eliminate the actual threat, and only that. They want a police state, not a secure and free one.

         1. Yes! Fu. Ckin. A.

   9. The west for years has been a place where the people are free, safe, and peaceful
      Consider that the actual threat of terrorism is low
      The problem I have, and I think a lot of people have, is that the new normal of having to suffer a constant series of terrorist attacks, even if at a low level, is completely unacceptable.
      I cringed a bit when I read ‘threat of terrorism is low’, since it initially sounds like we must accept that threat if the goal is to do away with the Patriot Act, surveillance, et alii.
      We’ll then need to return to a culture where people are peaceful. This means completely eliminating the cultural components that permit terrorism. This needs to become an interest and priority of the state.
      I personally know a man who was stripped of his citizenship and deported from his home country for religious proselytizing. While I believe this specific state (the Soviet Union) overreacted to perceived threats (Christianity), in a more general sense I cannot say this is an irrational way for a state to act in preserving their interests and culture. Perhaps this is a valid way for the west to act in preservation of core western values.

      1. I agree that in many ways, the powers that be have forced the hand of those in the west to cave in and give up their freedoms. If I lived in France, I could very well be calling for Martial Law and a crusade to wipe out the foreigners that were destroying our way of life. But that is falling in to the very trap that was set by the people who organized this whole problem.

   10. “Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.” – Henry Kissinger, May 21, 1992

       1. quotes like this just break my heart…

   11. No, the beauty of these restrictions is that they target specifically Islamic terrorists and criminals. The idea here is that a good government would be able to deal with it’s enemies without imposing itself on its citizens, much like how the British dealt with the IRA in the ’80s. The reason this would never work is because western governments aren’t interested in actually stopping terrorism, but rather in expanding the power and influence of some bureaucrats. So when reforms are called for, you get intrusions on the lives of everyday citizens with no real effects on terrorism.

3. So, to prevent a handful of radical muslims from destroying our culture and values, let’s tear them down ourselves first.
   That’ll teach them uppity sand-niggers.

4. Deport kebab. Build a wall. Guard the border and shoreline

5. Good stuff, agree! Points 3 and 9 are IMO by far the most important and effective.
   Look at how Israel handles it, they also have tons of concealed gun carrying people everywhere.
   Also, it needs to be addressed in legal terms how to handle when a civilian smokes one of these raghead monkeys. No jail, no investigation if it is clear.

   1. Do you know why you never hear about school shootings in Israel? Because all teachers are required to be packing and are trained and refreshed to keep their skills current. Texas gun control; hit what you aim at.

6. Useless, useless, USELESS.
   The big problem is not terrorism, it’s DEMOGRAPHICS. As long as the percentage of non-western people is increasing more and more in western countries, it’s just a matter of time that they reach the number that allows them to turn upside-down the country.
   The big threat is not a fucking terrorist asshole with an AK47, it’s a future Erdogan leading Germany, or France, or UK.
   You know what could happen? Check South-Africa. They really wish that their problem was a fucking terrorist with a truck. For them, reality is FAR WORSE.
   And this what is gonna happen in Europe and US because a simple time-bomb far more dangerous than any terrorist: DEMOGRAPHIC GROWTH.
   That’s the real threat.
   
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQvm8c5geSs
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIvX5oaSVes

   1. I agree with Poland and Hungary. Don’t let the barbarians into your country in the first place!! The hell with Pope Francis, he is a globalist and probably a mason also. Fuck him. Poland will not let in those who wish to destroy it!

7. Bonjour Jean-Batave !
   As a French man myself, I completely agree with most of your points. IMO, #6 is, by far, the most critical : just as everywhere else in the Western World, a large majority of french males are just mentally castrated. I am an healthy heterosexual white man with a good job and rather comfortable incomes, living without TV and without a smartphone, protective of his woman, able to physically defend his family and going to the church once a week : a few generations ago, it was precisely what a man had to be. Nowadays, according to what seems to be a majority of people (at least in the medias), it seems to be exactly what a fascist looks like.
   Speaking about fascism : right now, the main threat for our country is clearly radical islam. But not according to our government : in their opinion, the far-right (translation for non-Europeans : in the medias newspeak, far-right = patriotism) is the main danger and should be condemned at any cost.
   Hope is not dead, though … people slowly awaken. Who knows ? Perhaps Poitier 732 can happen again. History doesn’t repeat, but sometimes it stutters…

   1. I’ve always wondered why in Europe it’s considered blasphemy to be a nationalist. Sure, being a national socialist I can understand bit being proud of your own country? It just doesn’t make any sense.
      Even across the pond in the U.S. it’s starting to creep into the political landscape.

      1. The height of European prominence ended due to hypernationalism / The Great War. Then there is all the shame of anything to do with WW2, which was another exercise in extreme nationalism. So I understand the backlash to it, even if it’s wrong.

         1. Exactly : in the European ideology, patriotism is the cause and root of all wars. Considering that a nationat identity exists is racist/fascist too : five decades ago, De Gaulle said “France is a country of white race and of christian culture”; it was not racist, it was not fascist : it was just a simple fact and everybody used to understand that. A couple of years ago, a french politician (who is particularly stupid, but that’s another topic) dared to quote De Gaulle … and caused a huge mediatic scandal.
            Political correctness at its finest.

      2. Poland is nationalist right now…and they are getting a LOT of shit from the EU, crying that they are “not democratic” when in reality they kicked the communists out of power (believe me, there ARE communists in Poland, they just call themselves something else…and leftists refuse to admit they exist…)

   2. Hmm, point 6 is only relevant if the legal structure allows and protects them. As it stands now they do not, you cannot own a gun easily and even if you jump through the legal hoops to get one you are not allowed to use it outside of a range or hunting or carry it.
      If you respond violently to an attacker or a threat you are jailed far too often.
      Same shit in all of Europe, the rats in power have dug the hole quite deep.

   3. Main threat?
      How many people did actually die of radical Islam?

      1. Main threat.
         You don’t see people avoiding public transportation, restaurants and now even churches because of high sodium intake, cancer rates and financial gambling (even if any of these matters is more deadly, or more frequent in people’s lives).
         You can’t live in Europe with an unsafe public space. Say what you want, it is the fundamental value of our culture, since Roman times. In a public space where your life is at at stake, law is a detail. And that is not Ancient Europe (and its imperial law), Medieval Europe (and its christian law), Renaissance Europe (and its royal law) or the posterior Europe of the Revolutions (and the revolutionary, bloody laws of both 1789 and 1917). Terrorism is chaos, and brings with it the perception that your behaviour is unrelated to your possibility of getting murdered.
         If law can’t be imposed on terrorism, and Islam, Europeans will simply convert to Islam and abandon democracy altogether. “Law” is a perennial value for Europeans, and sharia IS law. Democracy is a circumstantial value, and if it requires the existance of lawlessness (continued, random terrorism), it will not prevail.

   4. I work and live a great part of the year in your country (in Paris), and I fully endorse your comment.
      The “great fight” is a cultural one, within nations.

8. Still waiting on a solution that doesn’t take away civil liberties….oh wait, an armed populace and reintroduction of masculinity.
   Stop making laws to defeat your foe. Innocents just suffer from unintended consequences. You are as gullible as a liberal to think threats disappear from intangible laws and government “help”. Placing massive power with the government is fine when it’s on our side, but iy never remains that way. What are we afraid of more? Death or liberty?

   1. Yes, exactly. Give fucking weapons to people!
      I live in Munich and I kinda saw how the police acted when the shooting happened here. 3.200 police forces going around. Everybody saying “Wow, our police is doing SUCH GREAT WORK! You are good men, police!”
      Yeah? 3.200 men who could not prevent a SINGLE death and took hours to catch the guy. If everyone had a weapon, how far do you think he would have come, eh? No, man, the police fucking failed.
      Yeah, they close up the streets and everything. Guess what? There are hundreds of side streets the police did not even think of that a terrorist can slip through…

      1. I think if members of the public had firearms in Nice the damage and destruction may not have been so great. The cops only managed to stop him after 2 miles by shooting at close range.

      2. And with your weapons, are you willing to launch a murderous excursion to your nearest muslim ghetto the next time a terrorist attack happens? Because that is how you fight with weapons instead of laws. If you like that kind of sectarian violence, you need to be prepared to retaliate illegally. That’s how they do it from Nigeria to Baghdad, and that’s what you need to be willing to do.

   2. I’m not an expert, but it seems to me that there are only two kinds of laws. Natural laws are laws that derive from that which is natural for the society and are designed to outline nature and punish deviancy. Unnatural laws are designed to punish the law abiding by criminalizing what is natural or decriminalizing deviancy.
      It seems to me that almost none of the laws passed in my lifetime have been natural, and so by default will punish the innocent.

      1. Correct. And this is because our societies have become more Judaic and feminized. Nothing will change until we confront this factor.

   3. This is america, not the third world. We organize our violence within the legal system, no american would be willing to kill outside the law, even to fight for self-preservation (unless the legal system collapsed). Laws can be used against the enemy, and in the west they probably should be, but they would have to explicitly target the enemy and we lost that ability after the civil rights movement.

      1. Which was a great damn ability to loose. Internment camps, segregation, loss of personal freedom are values the civil rights movement kicked in the teeth. Where I from, we don’t need daddy government to help us or tell us who is bad. We don’t fuck with anyone until the moment they fuck up, and we respond. The only legal concepts that need to be enforced are against jihadi enablers that want to take away citizen’s weaponry. Both the liberals and neocons must make sure the citizens suffer, don’t they?

9. Outstanding article! If we want to keep the western world free of terrorist scum, the points listed above need to be implemented pronto.

10. “Recently, the government threatened the surveillance service of the city of Nice if they do not destroy 24 hours of video recording on the day of the terrorist attack. To hide their blatant mistakes, or cover their tracks?”
    I was profoundly interested to hear about this. This is exactly what you might expect to happen if the attack was fake or a false flag or something. In fact there are predictably a whole host of sites out there speculating that Nice was a false flag or something along the lines. What interests me is that governments know this – they are fully aware of the conspiracy theorists out there, and of the fact that there will be allegations of conspiracy pretty much regardless of any evidence for this. Now the point here is not necessarily that there is or isn’t such evidence for Nice. So far I haven’t found anything to suggest that the attack was anything other what it appeared to be: a crazed terrorist running over innocent and real people on an iconic thoroughfare on the Riviera. The question is why would they risk inciting further conspiracy theory by engaging in such a request, and moreover doing it in such a way that it gets out to the public (surely they could have done it discreetly)
    In other words, the interesting thing here is not whether terrorist incident A or B was or was not a government, intelligence conspiracy (although obviously if there is any evidence that it might be that would indeed matter very much) but why it is governments seem happy enough to completely ignore the increasing paranoia in the world and just plod along with official narratives that take no account of discussion, disillusion and paranoia going on beneath that level. It’s almost as if the powers that be are happy for us to distrust us them. In a sense if you have an absolutely verifiable terrorist attack (such as Nice) and doubts are raised and conspiracy theory abounds, then to the extent that this can be easily and plausibly denied down the line, potentially helps to discredit the doubters amongst the wider public that isn’t quite so ready to fall down the rabbit hole.
    The narrative has to be maintained, sure. But the way that is done may be more involved than one might anticipate

    1. One of the reasons they want the video destroyed is that it would expose their lies regarding the police presence and enforcement of the rules which were in place.
       The truck was driving around several times in an area that has a 4ton Max, and also police vehicles blocking the access to the No Vehicles zone were removed shortly before the shithead drove in, leaving only flimsy plastic barriers.

       1. sure, that might be sufficient motivation in itself, but what a ham-fisted way to go about it. You can suppress something without requesting that footage be completely destroyed, which is bizarre

          1. French authorities are famously incompetent…

          2. that is true

          3. Aren’t all police?
             Have you read that article where a guy was denied becoming a police officer because his IQ was too high?

          4. Most things controlled by a central government are, but for instance local police in the countries where they still exist are oftentimes quite good in what they do I’d say.
             Haven’t read any specific article but I did hear of cases like what you describe mentioned.

          5. you dont say?
             

          6. Actually, from what Ive heard, you may get rejected from the academy if your IQ is too high…

    2. I don’t know how it is in France, but here in Germany, the police also warned against publishing anything about the attack and instead to send it to them. And the populace seemed quite happy about it, at least on Twitter. Out of 100 commenters, maybe 2 made a remark about censorship. I was one of those 2.
       People have such blind trust in their governments it’s scary.

       1. germany is a special case I think. People want to trust their government. At least that’s my impression from the outside – for what it’s worth. After the war germans and austrians were sometimes criticised for their relationship with authority (e.g. Adorno etc) and perhaps that hasn’t really changed (even if the nature of authoritarianism has)

11. As written in the Chinese classic military text, The 36 Martial Strategies:
    If you wish to catch a thief, first catch his king.
    Saudi Arabia. Hold Mecca hostage, tell the Saudis to keep their Daesh shitheels in check, or else. Since no one has the stones for this, not even Putin, get them by the balls economically.

    1. Meh, just nuke it and turn the whole country into a glass desert.

       1. But then Islamic terrorists have nothing to lose, and we have no leverage.

          1. But also nothing to fight for. Turning Mecca into a glass paved parking lot would disprove the whole thing I think to a large degree.
             That said we should anyway offer them all a mandatory flight to Mecca just we don’t need no stinking landing, drop em at 12k no Shute.

          2. Here’s a Swedish shocker http://www.recode.net/2016/7/29/12318834/girls-coding-camp-tech-careers-in-the-making

    2. Apparently the economic ball wrangling is happening already. With oil prices going low, cracking going on, and alternative energy sources going online, the Al Sauds are going to be in a world of hurt.

       1. And they know it which is why they are trying to buy up food production, like Canada’s wheat board.
          The Saudi’s stated the oil war, we need to finish it. One of the smartest things Obama did was make a deal with Iran. Now bury the hatchet with Venezuela, and get them to duke it out with the KSA over oil. To borrow again from the Chinese: borrow a sword to make your kill.

    3. Saudi is the elephant in the room….and they would not take any refugees, nor would Kuwait…they were…get this…”too different”….men leaving their wives and children behind in a war zone. Assholes!

12. Terrorism is a diffuse threat: one that requires few active agents, can strike anywhere and at any time, and for which warning is usually nonexistent. A diffuse threat must be countered with a diffuse defense. Accordingly, arm the populace. This is something Europe’s government won’t do — but note that terrorist attacks in America occur almost exclusively in those parts of the country where private citizens are discouraged from owning and carrying weapons, if not forbidden outright.
    Of course, when an eighteen-wheeler is bearing down on a crowd there isn’t much that can be done on the spot. Most citizens, even here in America, aren’t willing to tote an RPG around in their daily travels.

    1. Yup.
       How can you even think it is possible to predict a terrorist attack?
       The shooter in Munich had a weapon – despite strict gun laws and having been institutionalized formerly. If those circumstances are not enough, what circumstances are?
       And. He got away from the police for hours, despite having started his attack in a well-crowded area.

13. I’ve gotten through to a few leftists recently by telling them that the price of immigrating third worlders from Islamix countries means we need to accept a few murders here and there. A few kids run over by buses once in a while.
    I’ve told them that if we can only admit this I’ll be more in favour of mass immigration and cultural suicide.
    Some lash out in anger, while others are genuinely disgusted at the thought.

    1. The ignorance, lack of worldliness and general naivety of the millennial generation is astounding. Has there ever been such a cognitively and intellectually absent generation. It’s not even that they don’t care, like the 80s generation who wanted to live nihilistic lives of self serving abandonment and pleasure and say “go fuck the world”, whom I don’t necessarily admire, but, kind of appreciate their commitment to fulfilling their lives on their own terms.
       With these kinds today, what is it?? Maybe it’s their need to be safe, secure and to be “correct” in their thoughts and manners that I find so unhealthy in such young spirits? Youth is meant to be a time to challenge and question and when they lash out in anger at you as you said, it only proves how “safe and secure” they want to be in their little hermetically sealed bubble of safe thoughts. It’s very sad.

       1. Millennials are living in a different universe.
          Social media + infinite entertainment + student loans + political correctness has rendered them as some of the most sheltered and confused people in history.

14. Yeah… good luck with that.
    You’ve missed the obvious one. France has been meddling in Muslim countries for decades, of course the chickens will come home to roost.
    Stop immigration? This works both ways my man. They can’t come in and you can’t leave. And then your government can do whatever it wants with you.
    And how about the abolishing the government monopoly on police power and firearm ownership? The police are useless at protecting you from terrorism and are purely a reactionary force, on hand to ensure dead men tell no tales.
    And you want to harm innocent people? Isn’t that… what terrorists do?

    1. Exactly.
       The police are indeed powerless.
       All the police is there for is to look strong and competent – not to actually be it. The police is a show of force. But ridiculously inefficient at actually solving problems. Police is a smokescreen, promising false security.

       1. Perfect example is New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. The cops abandoned their areas of responsibility (and who can blame them? They weren’t given adequate food, water and ammunition) and it was chaos until the National Guard arrived.

       2. The police are remarkably efficient at prosecuting speeding drivers however…

          1. And people like me who commit the atrocious crime of biking without using my hands!

          2. They prosecute that now?! Jesus…

          3. What do you mean, ‘now’. Been doin that for ages, I think.

          4. By “now” I mean “now” as opposed to “before”. I don’t know how long “ages” is but I never knew the level of nannying reached as far as how your rode your bike.

          5. Well, you’re not from Germany, are you.
             I now have to pay 5.940 EUR for calling a handful of cops assholes.
             And it is also typical here to sue someone for “insult” if they use an informal personal pronoun. To clarify: In English, there is just “You”. But in German, there is a polite “Sie” and an informal “Du”. If you address a cop with “Du”, he can sue you for insult. How is it determined whether it is an insult? By how he feels.

          6. €6000 to call cops assholes? Definitely worth it.
             Btw:

             Heaven and Hell
             Heaven Is Where:
             The French are the chefs
             The Italians are the lovers
             The British are the police
             The Germans are the mechanics
             And the Swiss make everything run on time
             Hell is Where:
             The British are the chefs
             The Swiss are the lovers
             The French are the mechanics
             The Italians make everything run on time
             And the Germans are the police

          7. Haha. Nice.
             Yeah, well, let’s wait and see what I get for punching two other cops. If calling them assholes costs 6000, I don’t know what madness they will think of to punish me for that. Presumably prison or more time in the looney house.

    2. Which sucks. French civilains shouldnt have to pay the price their officials do not (which bu the way have firearm protection regardless of gun laws)

    3. Another element to France’s problem:
       The large groups of young men from North Africa living in slums outside Paris that come from multi generational welfare famillies. They have never worked, are idle and largely not part of French society.
       Thus, socialism in the form of lifetime welfare has created a fertile ground for recruits for these terrorists.
       Idle young men are not good for any society.
       Stopping immigration entirely is not feasible anywhere but certainly no reason to bring potential trouble like Syrian refugees into ther country like Canada.
       Conversely not reason not to take measures to prevent them from comming..

       1. If that’s the case, sending entrepreneurs to Paris might be the solution. (Though the French will need to come up with a word for them…)

       2. Why is stopping immigration not feasible?

          1. In the short term it is, but long run we either need to have more babies or be ina situation like Japan where the population is in decline meaning a shortage of workers, increased tax burden etc..
             Now of course targeted immigration is the way to go.
             Met a woman from Ireland a few weeks back has job lined up will be a perfect fit..

    4. That is why we need geographically smaller governments, with competition no individual government would be willing to cut off immigration totally because it would be unprofitable, while at the same time no government would allow muslims in because that would also be unprofitable.

    5. “And you want to harm innocent people? Isn’t that… what terrorists do?”
       Yeah but it’s only terrorism if brown or Muslims attack and kill people. When white and Western nations invade countries for no reason, or for their imperial interests .. for power, control and wealth as the West has done for centuries, and mass murders hundreds of thousands through bombs and technology, it not “terrorism.” It’s just some nefarious “Jewish elites” that somehow are controlling everything and magically twisting Western politicians, power brokers and arms industries to do their bidding. No, it’s definitely not because of a sick “death cult” and depraved Western culture and a sick system of arms industries that creates weapons for industrialized slaughter and mass murder, nor is it because of the system of Western capitalism requires constant expansion to sustain itself.
       Only when Muslims and brown people kill white people is it “terrorism” and their culture and religion is to blame.

    6. You’re blaming the victim

       1. Don’t be daft.

15. Too bad Schengen will end up going away, but the Europeans screwed up bad.

    1. Why too bad?! Get a passport and don’t be a criminal and you will have no issues.

16. At first glance all that sounds good however handing all that power over to the government to take care of terrorists means that they would also have the power to take care of you.

17. To avoid breeding terror and crime behind bars phase out the prison. Only pretrial detention,death row and forced labour should remain.
    replace with executions for the worst and those who can only be warehoused for the rest of their lives, and fines for more petty criminals along with public corporal punishment let only those who refuse to get a job to pay their fine be put into forced labour.
    Prison doesnt work. Lets stop using jail itself as punishment.

    1. Prisons work well enough when it’s done correctly, statistics prove this. The prison should not be like in the USA, but rather like in Sweden or other Scandinavian countries, the systems there may seem counterintuitive but they work very very well. They are rehabilitation centers. Reoffending rates are very very low.
       That said, it only works for certain types of criminals, terrorist scum should be executed and their families deported and all their property seized or destroyed.

       1. And statistics also prove the growth of criminal gangs behind bars running their street gangs. Likewise prisons make petty criminals worse by removing them from rehabilitation of community.
          Whats the point of warehousing people that cannot be released into society as perpetual parasites?

          1. I have never seen any statistics done on prison gangs in Sweden, the only ones I know of are OG and Brödraskapet both of which are nuisances at worst. Biker gangs are a much bigger issue than they can ever hope to be.
             So if you have some, please provide link.
             Keep in mind any information not from or relating to Scandinavian prison systems is irrelevant to the topic. I know they are an issue in the US, the reason for that is blatantly obvious.

          2. Ok. Its also to do with demographics. Hence a multiracial society like Singapore has a particular system.

18. 3 simple methods to deal with terrorists.
    1. Immediatly shutdown immigration from countries of terrorists.
    2. Round up people who share the same ethnicity and beliefs as the terrorists, and place them in government camps or deport them.
    3. Identify the terrorists country of origin, and indiscriminately bomb civilian locations and terrorist base’s. Instill fear in them so profound, they wish to never jihad again in the West.

    1. It has to be on a genocidal scale too. Last bombs should be targeted at food storage and water supply and sewage. A country like Saudi Arabia needs to have all of it’s desalination plants destroyed on the way out.

    2. You are a freaking idiot. You think a suicide bomber has a fear of death or bombs?

       1. What they think doesnt matter, as long as they’re dead and cant attack the west.

19. “Legal decision must be taken by the government against firms such as Twitter, that still relay terrorists messages after investigation of their nature. They should be indicted for treason.”
    Are you kidding?

    1. You are aware that providing material support to terrorists is illegal?
       We know that they can take down accounts with lightning speed when they want to, but they only do so to conservatives and right leaning people.

       1. I don’t believe in the law. “Illegal” is not an argument to me.
          Twitter is something that somebody built and it is his, as far as I am concerned.

          1. How about immoral and unethical then?
             By that I would also like to see people seek compensation for damages occurred by terrorist attacks sponsored by Twitter.

          2. I don’t think it is unethical. A social platform does not kill anyone. People do.
             Seriously, this is a weak argument anyhow, because if Twitter was to block them (considering that’s easily done, which I guess it is not), they would just find another platform.

          3. By your ‘logic’ it’s pointless to punish a murderer and throw him in jail because someone else will be murdering..
             If you sell ammo to a guy who is screaming his head off about killing people is that not wrong? That’s the same as this, Twatter knows their intentions, and knows they have done it in the past, has the ability to deny them access, but chooses to provide their services to these scumbags.
             Everyone knows people kill people, not guns or websites, but in my view the fact that they didn’t directly kill doesn’t completely absolve them of any responsibility.

          4. Well, I can’t speak for Twitter, but here’s the thing.
             I have been thinking about creating a website that is similar to Facebook, but completely without Reporting mechanisms. That is, a platform where you can say anything, to whomever you like.
             The thing is, I realize that such freedom may seem dangerous to some. But then, when thinking about how to weigh the arguments, I would likely choose to realize the idea of a free platform over security concerns. This is because I think that many people end up doing shit like that because they are alone with their thoughts and emotions and unable to express them. Hence they suck it all up and in the end, they go out shooting people.
             As for Twitter, I imagine it would be fairly easy for a terrorist to just create a new account. Do you have any confirmed sources about terrorist accounts that have communicated in this way?
             Besides, let’s not forget the benefit of keeping these accounts open, if they are real. As long as they are open and actually used by these people, Twitter and possibly the police forces can monitor their activity.

          5. I agree with you. Its like selling radio ad time to terrorists…stop selling it to them!

          6. If so, make sure that it is cryptographically secure, and that people have some way of filtering their content by user’s ideological affiliation (mediated by admins of groups who give certain people certain ratings), and you will have created Mencius Moldbug’s version of wikipedia.

          7. Yes, I was thinking about it. My favorite version is one where evrn I as the owner cannot access the decrypted content without permission.

       2. It’s analogous to being an accessory for murder-Twitter and Facebook are facilitating murder by allowing these animals to post their sickening material and to rally themselves to commit said acts.

20. Point 5: Control the media source. Isn’t there a strong principle whereby governments could sue Twitter and Youtube for spreading hate crimes? Why aren’t all the usual leftist groups like anonymous out shaming and undermining them for spreading hate…oh because it’s against imperial, white, western culture and and that’s alright.
    These liberal maggots are worse than the terrorists.

21. You need only one solution – abolish usury and debt-money.
    Everything else is secondary.

    1. Funnily enough, I think the Islamic religion does. Perhaps hence the hard push by globalists to castrate it like Christianity.

22. To be fair, politicians aren’t paid to protect their citizens, they’re paid to protect their globalist masters. Which is why most of them need to be summarily executed right alongside the jihadis.

    1. Also remember that the Supreme Court has ruled that police in the US have no duty to protect the citizens.

       1. never forget that when they start justifying their killings with all they risk for us.

       2. Don’t doubt you but didnt hear that. Any direct link or just opinion ?

23. Is terrorism a form of beta male rage?
    

    1. Brown muslims are the very lowest on the sexual totem pole, so I guess the possibility of 72 virgins being made available to them in the next life is something they so desperately have to believe in.
       Nobody who gets to enjoy prime gash in the real world would ever blow themselves up for hypothetical gash.

       1. How are they the lowest on the totem pole ?? Islam is the second biggest religion in the world and “brown” as your ignorant racist arse calls it relates to the vast majority of them and they can even practice polygamy. So I would say It’s you that is low on the totem pole.

          1. Any culture/race that has to resort to arranged marriage/and or violence to get a fuck IS lowest on the totem pole. At least women fuck me because they want to.
             “So I would say It’s you that is low on the totem pole.”
             Also projection.

          2. Never grant a fool an audience. It is on fair on them.

          3. On the contrary, arranged marriage might be a huge reason why Muslim numbers are growing and Christian numbers (or at least European Christians) are decreasing. “Christian” women are now free to run around with whomever they want, and… well we’ve seen how that’s played out in both quality of women and demographics.

24. I disagree with point 3. They’re willing to burn their wives alive, stab their sisters for honor, use their children as human shields and/or send them to suicidal attacks. They have no value for human life at all, not even for their relatives. Targeting families serves no purpose but giving press more excuses to defend them.

    1. The Jewish controlled media will ALWAYS defend the terrorists. The Jews want a civil war between nationalists and multiculturalists in all Aryan Nations, while at the same time the Islamic pigs flood our Nations. Successful White Revolution is the only Solution.

25. Multiculturalism is Death!

26. “Lethal injection of alcohol and pig blood laced with cyanide after forcing them to sign a written statement where they renounce and disavow Islam and the teachings of the prophet could work.”
    What the fuck?!

    1. All things considered, it sounds like a reasonable level of pissed off for a Frenchman that loves his country and culture.

       1. It’ll just make the problem worse.
          Muslims will hear stories about Muslims being drowned in pig blood and become radicalized.
          Also, the West has Muslim allies in the Middle East who help fight terrorism. They won’t like this sort of thing, and as a result their effort in helping fight terrorism may be reduced.
          It’s a dumb idea to deliberately offend Muslims. The stuff about deporting family members and so on may have a good effect, though. Yet drowning a Muslim in pig blood is no different than gang raping Western hos because they wear skimpy clothes. You might think it sounds different, but it won’t sound different to a Muslim. Wait until your own daughter is that “Western ho” and then it won’t seem so amusing.

          1. Nope, when they understand that no matter what they do, the retaliation will continue, they will give up and follow the laws. Happened in the German peasant’s war, happens everywhere a government controls an unruly populace. You actually can kill your way out of an insurgency.
             I grant that the drowning in pig’s blood is excessive, but that may be the only way to get it through to the Islamic extremists. They behave irrationally, seeking virgins in heaven, so irrational means must be used to suppress them.
             As to the ‘gang-raping western ho’s,’ the difference is that that is them, and the pig’s blood is us. They started an offensive war against the west, so they deserve whatever cultural attack we can throw at them.

          2. You don’t understand. There’s a difference between tough laws and unnecessary insults.
             Tough laws can potentially begin to reduce the problem immediately. Unnecessary insults will only lead to WW3, and you won’t see a shred of peace until you’ve won it (and there’s no guarantee that the West CAN win).

27. Send back muslims to their own beloved countries. All of them.
    I see Maroccans walking around here with flags on the back of their joggingoutfits. I see Turks waving flags when Turkey plays a soccermatch. Go back to your countries if you think those hellholes are so amazing.

28. But according to libtards the best way to combat terrorism is to show tolerance towards the Islamic terrorists. Clearly the French (and Germans) haven’t been showing enough tolerance. If they did then these attacks would stop. Just when will these Europeans learn??

29. on what fucking planet is priests blood comparable to children ??? that type of retarded hyperbole only serves to discredit your point. Priests are no better nor no worse than politicians and to even mention them in the breath as children is ludicrous.

    1. What the fuck are you babbling about?

       1. I really couldn’t be any clearer.

    2. Except when they are child molesters af course.

30. Note that the West likes to destroy more modern and secular states like Iraq, Libya, and Syria, rivals to Israeli hegemony. Afghanistan seems like an exception to this rule, but it was actually getting quite modern and secular (see picture) before the US backed the fundamentalists as a tool against the Soviets.

31. Maybe we could get our ‘best friend’ Israel to stop patching up ISIS fighters. They say they do it for humanitarian reasons.
    Here’s the Jerusalem Post quoting the Wall Street Journal:
    http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-Israel-treating-al-Qaida-fighters-wounded-in-Syria-civil-war-393862
    “The Wall Street Journal quoted ‘an Israeli military official’ who said that most of those treated were armed rebels fighting the regime.
    ‘We don’t ask who they are, we don’t do any screening,’ the official said. ‘Once the treatment is done, we take them back to the border and they go on their way.’”

    1. But Isis and various ‘terror’ groups are doing such wonderful work de stabilizing Israel’s enemies. It makes sense they want them back out there fighting fit.

32. Good article, by the way. You write “some left-wing French newspapers said that the Normand priest Jacques
    Hamel was just ‘killed’ instead of having his throat slit like a
    slaughtered animal”, yet many sources suggest he was actually beheaded. That’s what they do.

33. Gas chambers.
    There. I said it.

    1. Fuck off idiot

       1. Get over it, cuck. Muj and shitskins need to be exterminated.

          1. But you need to be exterminated before anything else.

          2. Go suck your Rabbi’s cock

          3. If I was Jewish I would be forcing diversity you, not railing against it. Diversity is a weakness.

    2. I 100% but this isnt the time to bring up jews.

34. With an article as reactionary as this, you all need to read Mencius Moldbug’s old blog at http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com. I don’t know of any more logical, rational, and even-minded modern defense of reaction as this site. It will clear up the whole argument, and any two readers of this site, no matter how much they disagree, will find this man to be reasonable, and correct.

    1. I’ve heard that Nick Land stands for many of the same things, but I haven’t had a chance to read up on him yet.

35. Chancellor Merkel just came out with her own 9 measures to prevent future terrorist attacks:
    “She also outlined a nine-point plan to increase security in Germany, which would include: an office for information technology that would concentrate on decoding internet communications between would-be attackers and terror groups; an increase in personnel at Germany’s intelligence agencies; a national register to monitor people entering and leaving the country; a lower threshold for deporting asylum seekers who break the law; regular joint exercises with the police and military to practice measures necessary in case of a terror attack; and an ‘early-warning system’ to flag up radicalisation among refugees.”
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/28/merkel-rejects-calls-to-change-germanys-refugee-policy-after-attacks
    “Wir schaffen das!”

36. great measures. A ban on Islam is a must. Yes, with death by firing squad with bullets dipped in pig’s blood.

37. How about we just drag the terorrist out into the street, tie them to a pole, drench them in pig blood, slice their stomach open and pull their guts out and leave them to die slow like the fucking rats they are. (Bonus points for periodically pouring alcohol into their wound, wouldnt want them to get an infection now would we?)
    Wtf is with all this deportation and policy bullshit, fucking kill these vermin.

38. a few weeks ago i just finished basic training in the US army. they didnt mention islam once. in fact they had us sit through a whole powerpoint presentation that revolved around discrimination and the idea that all peoples can become terrorists. i was shocked i got the impression that we are not even at war right now

    1. The only thing Obama’s minions, who are now running the military, are at war with is your white privilege, making sure you don’t offend your female platoon mate on the front line when you’re taking enemy fire, and that you’re respectful to your brown peers.
       Now if you want to talk about going gangbusters after Mr. Jones, the white, 50 year old suburban dad who goes to church every Sunday, takes care of his home, but also owns guns, hunts and belongs to the NRA. I’m sure your military higher ups will be encouraging.

       1. the girls in our platoon were the worst all they would do is bitch and complain while walking around with a sense of entitlement. at the end when it was announced the solider and solider leader of the cycle were both females all i could do was laugh. sadly, the army has been compromised. our national defense budget is roughly $380 billion more than the next highest country and we cant defeat a bunch of uneducated inbreds on captagon. whats gonna happen when we face an actual army?

          1. Almost like being in high school again, huh? The girls are the teachers pets and get chosen to “watch the class” ( i.e. rat out the malcontents) when the teacher has to step out.

       2. Or if he wants to go gangbusters against conservative Christians in the US, then Obama and his slimy government would be all for that too.

39. A simple solution: Ban Islam, close all mosques and expel all Muslims from Europe

    1. It is called the Spanish Solution: 1492.

       1. Re-reconquista; that’s what is needed.

40. 10. Use Pershing Method against muslins.
    http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com.br/2011/12/usmc-general-john-black-jack-pershing.html

41. Or maybe the Left could just pretend that radical muslims are Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority… Then they would be at war! The stupid fucking liberals think that conservative Christians are the real enemy even to this day as they are dropping in numbers.

42. 3. Targeting their families will be sure to increase attacks
    8. Are you going to force Jews to eat pork as well, many Christians live in the Middle East. They will become targets.

43. How about your elected gouvernments stop invading Middle eastern countries?
    http://thenewsdoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/madeleine-albright.png

44. Islamic terrorism is a pet project of the west. We need the middle east destabilised to further our interests of raping that area for their oil resources. ISIS creation is directly funded by the US http://thefreethoughtproject.com/wikileaks-exposes-clinton-isis/
    Best way to stop terrorism is to hold people like Hillary Clinton accountable and unable to hold any position of power or authority.

45. On August 9, 1945 the United States dropped a second nuclear bomb on Japan-they’ve been civilised ever since. I don’t need to say anything more than that as far as solutions are concerned.

46. I would add an additional step that also pushes the neomasculinity agenda. Would work best in America but there is no reason it couldnt work overseas either. Why not form militias and hear me out before I get dragged off to the looney bin. Just as in the days of the founding fathers communities would come together a few times a year and practice military drilling. Back in those days it was essentially to be able to march as a unit so they would march around the town square. Today however warfare and counter terrorism require an understanding of battlefield tactics. You dont have to practice with firearms. You really just need a group of men, some woods, and a little imagination. Practicing patrolling, ambushes, movement to contacts, all the essential US Military tactical fundamentals. Could be done with paintballs. In addition to the tactical basics the entire militia could then go to a shooting range to improve their marksmanship. All of this would be completely legal and would help build a bond among the men playing soldier for a weekend. The group could then go to bars and discuss how the operations went after a weekend of training.

47. If power attracted anyone other than the world’s dumbest self loathing sociopaths, this would be a non issue. However, since that is the case, all of our leaders seem to lack any common sense and are hellbent on fulfilling their death wish while bringing millions down with them. A normal, sane, educated male would look at this situation and come up with the simple, elegant, obvious solution. Deport the invaders, or, here’s a thought, never let them in in the first place!

48. Interisting list.. however I am against the death penalty… we need not provide Islam with additional martyrs…. Perhaps against Osama bin Landen… (he has followers outside he remains dangerous behind bars)…Apart from him foot soldiers of terrorist attacks shouldnt be executed… They should spent their lives in prison.. perhaps in solitary confintment.

Comments are closed.