The Bad news and the good news

The press is going nuts about the Paris attack.

But some people are equating a minor terror attack to the end of the world

Chill, Francis.

Yes, I said minor: it was three attacks and one didn't succeed, and the one at the rock concert succeeded because of lack of security. Russia and the US have had worse attacks, not to mention the Philippines India and China.

And to those who blame all Muslims for the attack: Well, that would like blaming me for the IRA attack on Maggie Thatcher. (Jimmy Breslin went to Ireland and quipped: It's the catholic atheists and the protestant atheists killing each other).

But there is one difference between the IRA and these bozos: join the IRA and you were excommunicated by the church. But there are many immans and mullahs who support the Muslim extremists trying to revive an Islamic utopia that never existed.


If there is one little piece of good news here it is that "Anonymous" will stop attacking America as the evil one and go after the real bad guys.

Yes, US spying on the internet is dangerous to your safety if a dictator takes over, but some folks noted that the information that Snowden released alerted these latest bozos how to plan the attack unnoticed.

Snowden's minions hyperventillated over US spying: but a small story last week revealed Germany's spying was just as bad, but didn't get the two minute hate in the left wing echochamber (and this was against their darling President Obama: Imagine if President Bush/Cruz/Trump/whoever is in charge).

As for Islam: All religions have extremists, but most of the time it is about utopians trying to make a paradise, be it the Roundheads of Cromwell, the legions of Rome, the utopians of the French revolution, or the legions of Mao/Lenin/PolPot.

The good news is that most Muslims seek a personal relationship to God.

The bad news is that Mohammed,when confronted with infidels who opposed him,  decided that war was okay against the infidels. And like Cromwell, these bozos arise, quote the koran, and try to destroy those less pious in the name of religion.

the UKTelegraph editorial notes:

Revenge, rather than willingness to compromise or submit to the victors, is the traditional response of Islamist Muslims to the defeat of Muslim armies. And for them, this battle has no front line and is not limited to a few years or even decades. They think in terms of conflict spread over generations...

And the dirty little secret is that there are some Muslim states (who shall be nameless) who are pushing these ideas (not out of piety but so they can keep power and control all that lovely money).

again, from the UKTelegraph editorial:

The fundamentalist interpretation of Islam is not a common mode of thinking for most Muslims, especially in recent times. But it is clearly driving the political agenda in Muslim countries

My own take: Uh, you might use the internet and modern weapons, but who is going to run the place for you? (dirty little secret: the Middle East etc. requires outsiders to run their hospitals and oil fields etc. Get rid of the Pinoys and Indians and who will keep the oil fields running, not to mention clean your house and take care of your kids?).

and notice: They managed to kill unarmed civilians at a rock concert, but even they didn't manage to get into the stadium because a security guard stopped them.

and maybe the Pope is hyperventillating because the church remembers the many, many times that Islam aimed at destroying Rome as they did Constantinople. Lepanto anyone?

so what is the answer?

well, it is NOT to give them a hug and put a French flag on facebook.