What is Not Being Said About the European Train Incident

As have most other sentient beings in the Western world, I have followed with fascination the story of the foiled jihadi attack on a  European train. As we know, a Moroccan practitioner of the Religion of Peace boarded an Amsterdam-Paris high speed train armed with an AK, a pistol, and a knife, and with the intent of killing infidels and, presumably, earning his prescribed quota of dark-eyed virgins.

He picked the wrong train. A gang of infidels, four Americans and a Briton, frustrated the Maghrebi's plan for eternal bliss by disarming him, pummeling him into unconsciousness, and trussing him up like a Christmas (oops!) turkey.

This story says a lot about many things--not all being prominently discussed. We begin by noting the nationalities of those who bravely launched and executed the uprising against the Islamist wannabe killer: big, strong, young American men assisted by an elderly, wise-cracking, man of the world Brit. Central casting had to have a hand in this. Following in the footsteps of the heroic passengers on Flight 93, this Anglo-American squad refused to let the jihadi have his way. He would not kill those passengers on that train that day. That immediately raises a question. Why is it that Anglo-Americans are much more willing to take matters into their own hands? I'll leave that for the sociologists, but I am sure readers will have opinions. By the way, I am certain had there been Australians, Israelis, or Canadians on that train they would have joined the Maghrebi bash. I think that says a lot about where one might yet find the remnants of Western civilization.

I see the press is now full of stories re the need to review security measures on trains and buses, etc. As the Beatles would say, "Yeah, yeah, yeah." While you're at it, let's look at security in casinos, shoe outlets, bingo parlors, linen stores, supermarkets, restaurants, gas stations, etc. Lots of stories, too, about how the Spanish security services had flagged Mr. Morocco, noting he had gone off to Syria to do a spell with ISIS, and passed his name to the French, Dutch, Germans, etc. Cue the Beatles,"Yeah, yeah, yeah." OK, he was flagged. So? He had no trouble moving around Europe, and, ahem, despite Europe's draconian gun laws, obtaining an AK, a pistol, lots of ammo, and a knife, oh yes, and boarding a crowded international train with all this gear. I note, by the way, that he was apparently the only person armed on the train--some, such as me, might argue that a 99.9% "gun-free" zone is considerably more dangerous than a 50% "gun-free" zone.

Lots of issues here. The biggest one, of course, is being totally avoided. Shall we dare mention the elephant rampaging in the living room? Yes, by all means, let's. Why was Mr. Morocco in Europe? Why is Europe allowing itself to be flooded by a invasion of persons who adhere to a violent, totalitarian ideology, i.e. Islam? These persons detest everything about the West, ridicule its kindness and generosity as contemptible softness, and see us all as candidates for forcible conversion, enslavement, and death. Believing in the values of Western civilization does not mean signing a suicide note.

All the flagging, monitoring, metal detectors, peace marches, Coexist stickers, and "guns banned" signs will do nothing, or worse, as long as the adherents of the Religion of Peace are allowed almost unfettered entry into our countries and homes, and as long as we continue to accept the fiction that Islam is a religion just like any other. Short of our dealing with that, you better hope and pray that wherever you are there are brave Anglo-American men around who will fight and die for you.