Okay…halal sausage is okay.
Paris police on Tuesday banned a controversial ‘pork sausage and wine’ street party planned by extremist groups to combat what they saw as the ‘Islamisation’ of a city neighbourhood.
The event was planned for Friday evening at a time when the district’s streets are usually jammed with Muslims coming out of mosques and just before Algeria were due to play England in the football World Cup.
But police banned the event and any rival gatherings in the Goutte d’Or area of northern Paris’ 18th arrondissement, or district, saying in a statement that it was likely to cause ‘serious risks to public order.’
Ponder that last statement for a minute: a group of French people announce that they’re going to eat French food in public, in France, and it’s deemed a “serious risk to public order” – a provocation, in effect.
Interesting times:
“A French government minister of Algerian descent…condemned the planned party as ‘hateful, racist and xenophobic.'”
We are next! The critical mass is developing and some one has to stop the train wreck. I am for restricting immigration. We have done it before and must do it again.
Posted by: L at June 17, 2010 2:47 AM
You got that right L. If you read that long story in the NP about the guilty pleas of the father and son sons-of-Allah who murdered that young teenager, you clearly see how ONE Paki family can easily result in a pop. boost of 50 or more (yeah, I said Paki). For what possible reason did we import these benefit-seeking savages?
ET is of course correct; it is a provocation and a very deliberate one. But we’ve reached the stage now in the West where deliberate provocation or push back is urgently necessary. I hate the notion of vigilante justice but NOW I’m gung-ho for it; vigilante justice is coming — lawlessness engendered by a lawless and utterly disconnected and appeasing political elite which has flushed our birthright down the drain. I’m with L: END MUSLIM IMMIGRATION without mentioning “muslim” of course.
I was absolutely thrilled to read about the EDL and others tossing frozen pork sausages at those blood-thirsty muslim savages who put on that little display for the British soliders in Barking. Thrilled.
Never forget the stong horse-weak horse formulation of OBL. That is the ruling ethic of these medieval savages. We chatter, we engage, they laugh in our faces. Let’s punch some face.
Me: “let’s punch some face” … metaphorically speaking of course …
ET: “For example: Host the street party. Same time; same place. BUT, have booths that offer your pork and wine; and booths that offer..vegetables and juice. That point is, to reject THEIR insistence that WE have to follow their rules, and show them that both sides can live in the same area.”
Absolutely right, yet utterly unsurprising that ET’s principled but pragmatic suggestion is roundly rejected by all here.
The party as originally conceived would have been a pointless and self-defeating antagonization. The local hardliners (on all sides) would only become more hardline, a segment of once-neutral moderates (on all sides) would gravitate towards their respective extremes, and the remaining dwindling moderates would continue to shake their heads at the tragedy of it all. True, “Sylvie Francois” would have “taken a stand,” but to what broader end? None of her/his root concerns would have been resolved, and the only thing likely to have been achieved would be further ideological polarization and entrenchment by all.
As reported in last night’s news feed, over the weekend the French flag at the town hall in the city of Villeneuve-Saint-Georges was burned and replaced with an Algerian one. Vlad Tepes managed to find a news video about the story, and has subtitled it in English:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2010/06/reflagging-mairie.html#readfurther
“They will never assimilate, their whole purpose and life mission is to convert each and every one of us.”
And the exact same things were said of:
– German immigrants to N. America in the 1750s,
– Irish immigrants in the 1850s,
– Chinese immigrants at the turn of the 20th century,
– Jewish, Italian, Polish, and other Eastern and Southern European immigrants in the early 1900s,
– Japanese immigrants during WWII, and
– Mexican and Latin and South American immigrants in recent decades.
“the only thing likely to have been achieved would be further ideological polarization and entrenchment by all.”
Yeah, Or NOT!
For anyone who has of late attended the Tamil Tigers and Anti Israel demos knows the cops are always facing the wrong way.
“This Is Sparta” and lots of us will fight for it like our forefathers did and win.
Screw them, bacon, wine, beer for everyone, dogs, jews, gays, and half dressed chicks are likewise encouraged.
For once – and probably the only time – I agree with Davenport. Will wonders never cease.
Black Mamba – heh, I don’t think that pork sausage and wine is ‘typically French’.
Glasnost – no, this provocation is not desensitization.
Phantom – I agree with lots of unveiled women IF these women were not at risk. I don’t agree with them being armed. But if the situation has deteriorated to such a degree that they are at risk, then it is the government’s duty to enact laws against the veil.
How could the situation get so bad? By allowing these people to think that they could come to France and recreate their culture there. By ignoring that they were doing this for years, and then, when the critical mass was reached, and these people began to demand that the entire population also behave like them…then only France wakes up?
Australia has a legal written requirement of all visa and other entrants that they MUST respect the current culture of Australia – including gender equality, democracy, the English language. Harper’s new immigration rules are quite similar.
But when a situation has gotten past that critical threshold, then setting up a ‘bully-war situation’ where the two sides enter into generations, and I mean generations, of adversarial hatred – won’t work.
Louise – I am not advocating multiculturalism, which I am against, and which has led to France’s current situation..i.e., of ignoring and refusing to assimilate newcomers. Nor am I advocating that the French abandon their culture. But I am advocating a street party that assimilates them to the notion of a) we are all humans; and b)we can live together; and c)this is how we celebrate the summer in France.
Justthinkin – your backyard barbecue is not the same as a street party, and your inclusion of your Jewish neighbours to bring their own kosher meat is EXACTLY the same type of street party I am suggesting.
Alain, I agree with your summary and the Muslim insistence that their way is ‘the only way’ must be rejected.
That’s why I don’t advocate an adversarial agenda, which sets up a situation where one side is eventually dominated by sheer force (that’s the jihadist way), but a situation where the incumbent domain (France) rejects your rejection of their culture and says that you CAN assimilate and participate..and this is how. Have a street party with both pork and non-pork products.
“They will never assimilate, their whole purpose and life mission is to convert each and every one of us.”
Yeah, its called Jihad there Davenport.
Islam has a 1400 year history of domination and intimidation.
“Have a street party with both pork and non-pork products.”
Sigh.If only it was so easy,ET.I like my bacon,ribs,etc.They like their ribs(beef),we agree do disagree,and have a lot of fun together.Funny thing is,they are the best neighbours I have had for 30 years. Cant we all just get along??
laventus: “Yeah, its called Jihad there Davenport.”
“It’s different this time” — they said that too about all the immigrant groups listed above.
9:29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah
hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
Posted by: Davenport at June 17, 2010 2:52 PM “groups listed above”
Try taking your uncovered wife into “their” cultural districts and neighbourhood and see how safe you feel.
They walk in ours and they may feel out of place, but they never feel like they have to worry about being attacked for their choices of attire.
Also, have you looked at the labels on packaging lately? We are predominantly an English speaking/writing nation, now the labels have Spanish first (US market), English second and French third.
Those cultures are not into assimilation, they are into domination.
I am not an arrian/stand up for white folks being taken over by the other colours freak.
What I am against is the belief systems of other nations which are forced on host nations through population expansion.
This is the downfall of the democratic society, and the Muslims know it and have no problem exploiting the laws of the host nation until they can democratically vote in their theocratic/mullah spoken laws of Islam. That is when the sword comes out and we all start living in hellholes like Somalia and Northern Sudan and the Congo.
If we don’t stand up now, we will be kneeling at the point of a sword in the years to come. It may not be us, but our children or grandchildren. That is the legacy and inheritance I will not leave them!
davenport – the European and other groups you mentioned did NOT have a declared purpose of overrunning your culture.
However, my view is that an adversarial confrontation won’t stop the Islamist agenda; it will simply harden it and increase their isolation and militant rejection of us and their determination to overthrow us.
There has to be a multileveled approach. First, we must absolutely reject multiculturalism. If you immigrate here, then, there is a dominant culture..and it consists of, for example, democracy, meritocracy rather than kin-based living, gender equality, the work ethic (the govt does not support you); the English language, freedom of speech, freedom of religion within the church/mosque does not mean intrusion of this religion into the common and other people’s lives.
If you reject any of these axioms – don’t come.
Second, we, in our daily lives, i.e., our neighbourhoods, have to reject multiculturalism. We also have to insist on assimilation of immigrants to those axioms outlined above. If we have a street party, it must not be one that deliberately excludes people who for various reasons, won’t eat the good. Jews and Muslims won’t be able to participate in that pork sausage fest. So have other foods.
Third, the govt must help us, on the commons, reject both multiculturalism and the Islamist attempt to dominate our culture. Therefore, those laws have to be passed. No Sharia law; no hate speech disguised as religious speech; no veils; no special deals about school days, etc.
This is sooooo NOT the same thing:
“They will never assimilate, their whole purpose and life mission is to convert each and every one of us.”
And the exact same things were said of:
– German immigrants to N. America in the 1750s,
– Irish immigrants in the 1850s,
– Chinese immigrants at the turn of the 20th century,
– Jewish, Italian, Polish, and other Eastern and Southern European immigrants in the early 1900s,
– Japanese immigrants during WWII, and
– Mexican and Latin and South American immigrants in recent decades.
ET said: “I agree with lots of unveiled women IF these women were not at risk. I don’t agree with them being armed. But if the situation has deteriorated to such a degree that they are at risk, then it is the government’s duty to enact laws against the veil.”
I am perhaps somewhat more militant than yourself, ET. Recall the New Hampshire license plate says “Live Free Or Die”, not “live free unless somebody makes a fuss”.
IMHO, in a -free- country women should armed or not at their sole discretion with the state having no say in the matter, for exactly situations such as this. Militants won’t be forcing the veil on armed women, it can’t happen. The state won’t be enforcing a veil ban on armed women either. Carry a Colt and wear whatever the hell you want, when you want, and hold your head up. That’s the proper situation in a free country.
BTW, since when does ET think a government ban on a piece of clothing is a good idea? Normally that’s a non-starter for you.
Provocations occur presently because we are -not- free. Muslims in Canada and France are beneficiaries of a two tier police enforcement structure. The day that stops is when we won’t need to bother with Bacon Day provocations any more. There are no Muslim Canadians. There are Canadians.
jcl (3:52) Re “their whole purpose and mission and life is to convert each and every one of us,” you said “the exact same thing was said of German immigrants, and Chinese and Italian and Japanese immigrants…”
Huh?
Wow. Talk about moving giant, fabricated goalposts on a jet-powered flatbed.
@ ET 3:44
Adversarial confrontation is the only way to stop the Islamist agenda. Do you seriously believe in Obamaesque “open hands” and “unclenching fists” rhetoric? The whole reason Islamic extremists are so determined to overthrow us is because they sense our weakness, smell blood and thus believe it possible.
Your proposal to drop multiculturalism is great but frankly it will never happen there are way to many feel good liberals out there who will cling onto it. Just look at Europe. They refuse to even see the truth right in their own cities.
Furthermore the governments will never support your plans either. That’s a) not “PC” and b) not the way future votes will go. The muslims have demographics on their side, and that’s the bottom line. In just one or two generations this debate will be ended for us. All we can do now is to eat all the bacon we can before we’re beheaded.
Sorry, jcl, I see now that your 3:52 comment was a republishing of one of Davenport’s comments from above.
However, my view is that an adversarial confrontation won’t stop the Islamist agenda
-ET
What unmitigated nonsense. Here, ET, you reveal your pathological Liberal Cognitive Egocentrism (Richard Landes). You too Davenport. You simply cannot get into the strong horse-weak horse head of the savage; as I said here numerous times, you’re smart, but not street smart. Can you really think this agenda can be handled with outreach and engagement? If so you’d have to explain the unmitigated disaster of the Obama apology and outreach tour.
NO, ET. This agenda will be SMASHED or it will WIN. Period.
You don’t want to provoke our Muslim overlords? Here’s how: stop appeasing, stop over-accomodating them, push back. They see and interpret concessions as weakness. They don’t do quid pro quo.
What about those muslims protesting against returning Brit soldiers in their towns, with screams of murderer? Using your provocation argument, shouldn’t those be banned? Isn’t that the ultimate provocation of the majority native infidel population?
Finally, ET, here’s the gargantuan contradiction in your provocation theory: western nations invading muslim nations to bring them the joys of a failing western democracy. You strongly favoured this (as did I initially before I woke up to the lunacy).
Phantom and M – yes, I’m not known for supporting govt intrusion but I don’t feel that this agenda of cultural domination by Islamists can be solved by a wild west cowboy style interaction of ‘the one with the gun wins’.
I think the Australian visa and immigrant requirement is necessary; it rejects multiculturalism and insists that the individual recognize the existent culture. Harper is setting up a similar immigration system here – although the Australian one includes even student visa and work visa entrants.
I think that the French govt rejection of isolationism by rejecting the veil and the attempt to insert religion in schools is necessary. Sharia law must be rejected.
Equally, I think that the govt is the place to reject demands under the guise of multiculturalism, eg, where a taxi driver gets away with refusing to drive someone with a dog, or a worker in a grocery store gets away with not ringing up a customer’s bacon, or where banks stop selling toy piggy banks…etc.
The govt is also the place to reject multicultural education. We, the people, must tell the govt that we don’t want this ‘folkfest’ culture and that a child schooled in this country must learn and respect this country’s history and values.
I most certainly reject Obama’s garbage. He ought to, as the govt, reject Islamic terrorism.
These are all steps that only a govt can take.
As for demographics and the Islamic takeover, I don’t see it happening. Why not? Because of those demographics! The world population is too large for an Islamic mode of life. What does this mean?
The Islamic mode of life, at the moment, is 7th c tribalism. It rejects individual free thought, rejects reason, science, and the political mode that enables reason and science..democracy. The Islamic mode of life is a DEPENDENT mode; it depends on the govt to feed it, house it, support it. It is not entrepreneurial, scientific, technological.
The world population is too large to be sustained by a population that is unable to innovate, develop new sources of energy, food, new medicines etc. So, an Islamic mode of life cannot sustain the modern global population.
Simple as that.
me no dhimmi – are you unable to read my posts? I’m not talking, ever, about appeasing the Islamic agenda. Where do I say that? And I’ve no idea what ‘Liberal Cognitive Egocentrism’ means.
I reject multiculturalism, reject sharia, reject the veil, reject special school days..Where do I talk about ‘outreach and engagement’?
I support the Australian rejection of multiculturalism. I support the French rejection of the hijab and veil. Where do I talk about accomodation or concessions? Where? I reject both and that’s what I said!
I’m saying that to deliberately go into a ethnic neighbourhood – and all immigrants tend to collect into neighbourhoods whether they are Italian, Chinese, Portuguese or Jewish or Muslim – but to go into such a neighbourhood with the deliberate agenda of confronting their cultural mode of behaviour will enrage and harden their rejection of the duty of assimilation. Allowing ethnic privileges AND confronting ethnic differences with hostile actions – will lead to further isolation and intense hatred.
The Islamic thugs protesting the returning British soldiers should be arrested. BUT, how did such a mentality emerge? By allowing ethnic isolation, allowing multiculturalism isolation, AND, AND, allowing violent confrontations between groups.
A street party that is a deliberate provocation will have one result only: a hardening of isolation and a deepening of hatred.
And I still support going into the tribal Islamic states and enabling democracy to emerge. Democracy is the only method that I can think of to stop Islamic fascism – which is the root cause of jihadism.
You ‘smash’ Islamic fascism by a number of tactics. One – is the rejection by the West of multiculturalism. If you come to the West, you assimilate. There is no accomodation for your old ways except in the privacy of your home; not in the workplace or the school or shops. This is the job of the govt.
The ‘street bully’ tactic of provocation by one group vs another group -that street pork party – will make thing worse.
The other tactic is to break tribalism as the political mode of the Islamic nations. This is vital.
The other tactic is to name jihadism and Islamic fascism as a militant action and to fight it as such.
That’s three tactics. Now, how you can read this as ‘accomodation’ – well, that’s your problem.
“A French government minister of Algerian descent…condemned the planned party as ‘hateful, racist and xenophobic.’
Good old Al-Takeyyah: Lying for Allah
Not a thought that perhaps forcing most of Frances population to forbear pork sausage is Hateful, racist & xenophobic!
No no. The Islamist is above all.
He has the right in an alien land to force others to his ways.
This has to end or we will be extinct.
JMO
@ ET 4:46
Islam doesn’t have to be 7th century tribalism, and hasn’t always been 7th century tribalism. They were capable of scientific advancement in their heyday and then the Sultanate fell apart and they reverted back to the original Islam that served them so well.
For the moment however, they’re breeding and we’re not (Especially the Euros). The math is simple. By the time their population is large enough such that they need to move on from their Mohammedian nomadic tomfoolery, our way of life (and most of us) will have already been destroyed.
It’s kind of like what happened to every advanced country in the past except…it’s happening within our countries now. Sort of like what happens after an Alien face-hugger face rape. It’s kind of funny if you think about it.
Also: Yes we need to abandon multiculturalism but multiculturalism is in a way a symptom and not a cause of our problem. The west is no longer the devout crusader, or the jingoistic imperialist, or the flag waving nationalist of old. We’re weak and unsure, we no longer have the gumption to say “Our people and way of life is immeasurabily superior yours. So shut up or die.” We’re meek and timid and we channel Rodney King feelgoodisms like “Can’t we all just get along?” Hell, Theo Van Gogh was saying “can we talk about this?” as he was being butchered.
So even if we remove multiculturalism, we have nothing to replace it with. No unifying ideology to make us all proud unless we ourselves regress and retrench like the muslims did when their empire fell apart. The “West” no longer really has an existing culture. How many people would seriously go back to the bygone age of flag waving and savage stomping though? Seriously! Slaughtering savages really messes up your salon styled metro hair-do.
I just can’t honestly see a reasonable way out. The sad thing is that I haven’t been taking advantage of my depraved hedonistic liberty to it’s fullest either 🙁
ET: “I don’t feel that this agenda of cultural domination by Islamists can be solved by a wild west cowboy style interaction of ‘the one with the gun wins’.”
The one with the gun always wins ET. That’s why we carry them, or should anyway. Cowboys weren’t stupid, y’know.
But the larger point is, in an armed society the issue does not arise. When two people with guns disagree the result is not a duel, the result is a -polite- and restrained exchange of words followed by both people walking away. It is only in our disarmed liberal culture that the politics of intrusion and intimidation can be safely used.
However the point is moot, given the current law in Canaduh. Thus we must return to pointing and laughing as often and as loudly as possible.
That’s how one fights bullies, ET. Point, laugh, and when they swing on you, beat them soft. Rinse and repeat as required, some bullies are dumber than others.
Don’t forget, we as a society have -already- accepted these radical Islamists and accepted their religion as well. They are not content with being accepted and treated the exact same as everyone else, they demand we do it their way.
Well, sorry but that’s just not on. They came here, we didn’t go there, right? You don’t come to my place and tell me what to wear and eat.
So if some Bacon Day provocative Sharia bashing needs to occur to get the message across, and get it across peacefully I might add, that Canadians are just SO not going to put up with being pushed around, by Muslims OR by our government, I’ll eat some bacon with pride.
http://chromatism.net/fjordman/eurabiacode.htm
The Eurabia Code
by Fjordman
Just thought I’d share a link here…
Might be helpful to those who don’t understand why France is so fubar now…
@ ET 5:18
Ok sorry I guess I should have refreshed before I posted to avoid posting twice.
Islamic thuggery didn’t emerge because we weren’t “nice” enough to them, it is exported by the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Shieks and Wahhabi Clerics. I mean hell, look at Qutb, no one shoved him into a pile of hot dogs, he just saw us for what we were and hated us for it. Will allowing violent confrontation ameliorate their feelings towards us? No. But it won’t make it any worse, if anything they’d reconsider their bully tactics.
Look at past european muslim terrorists, they were doctors, engineers and presidents of university kill-the-infidel clubs. Hell even the son of a well travelled transnational businessman. Not socially marginalized schizo-denizens of the ghetto; clinging to the shadows, trying to make it to the local mosque while avoiding lynch mobs.
Also, Islam can’t really be shoved back into the kitchen like a housewife. Mohammed was both Emperor and Prophet. In many ways islamothugs live up to the spirit of Mohammed. I mean, what’s the difference between raiding caravans until Mecca surrenders or bombing trainyards so that dumb Spaniards overturn their government? I’ve always viewed Islam as a brilliant co-optation of the monotheistic faiths in Arabia to solidify the political base at home. It’s a political ideology and system of government much more akin to what inspired the US founders than Christianity. It was important so that Mohammed could go out in search of more booty (in both the booty call sense and the pirate sense yarrgg).
Also, great article similar angle at NRO: http://article.nationalreview.com/436543/bon-jovi-islam/andrew-c-mccarthy
This youtube video titled “What Islam is Not” has been around for a while,but is well worth watching for the first time,or again.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEXWjlgJ83E
Also, the real or completely made up assertion that every cultural immigration that Davenport listed actually was feared is foolhardy.
M – yes, I agree that Islam is more of a political and societal ideology than a religion. It’s religious axioms are thin and derived primarily from the Judaic. And what is interesting is that if you read the Islamic texts, you can see that they seem to be talking about a pastoral nomadic economy..which is based around men herding animals. This requires a large land base, and my view is that Islam emerged at a time of economic stress when Christianity, which emerged in an expanding market trade economy based around settled villages..and..was moving into the land base of the pastoral nomads..and so, Islam emerged as a militant ideology to fight against this spread of the settled agricultural trade economy.
Qutb, by the way, was hostile to the repression of the people by the tribal politics of the Islamic states in the oil-funded economy. This economy was enriching one tribe against the others – and Qutb assumed that modernization was the problem – rather than the tribal political system. So, he sought to get rid of modernization in Egypt, SA etc. I am presuming you’ve read Wright’s The Looming Tower.
I certainly agree; Islamic fascism didn’t emerge because we weren’t ‘nice’ to them. Its roots are, in my view, totally internal to the political and economic structure of the Islamic states – which have rejected the empowerment of their people and instead, represssed them within tribalism.
Tribalism is a two-class political system with one tribe dominant and the rest without power. What is needed in these massive population states is a three-class civic rather than tribal model, with a middle class having all political and economic power. This repression – is the root cause of Islamic fascism.
Exporting Islamic fascism to the west is a deliberate strategy of the Islamic nations to divert attention from the basic internal reasons to the West. Think about Iran – which brutally represssed its own people’s drive for democracy – and which Obama, to his disgrace, ignored. Iran is busy exporting terrorism around the world, in its drive to maintain tribal power and advance an imperial agenda.
M – I don’t think much of the Islamic history of science, though I do agree that they ‘could have’ but chose a different path. After all, we do have the phase of such Islamist great minds as Avicenna and Averroes. Both, if I recall, Aristotelians.
I think the world is going through a post-nationilist age. The era of ‘nations’ is over and the globe is a vast CAS or complex adaptive system, a networked economy. But, some of these ‘nodes’ or sites are organized in such a way that they cannot constructively participate in this network. Such as the Islamic states..which are fighting modernization.
I absolutely do not see a future world system that is Islamic. Their ideology, as it is now, is unable to economically and intellectually participate in an innovative manner with the modern technology. All their technology that they use – comes from the West.
phantom – what if it’s THEM who ‘beat you soft’? I disagree with deciding issues by brute force. Admittedly, that’s quite possibly because in the ‘real world’, I’d lose such an interaction.
Ultimately ET, brute force is what almost always decides issues. What is your government ban on the veil other than brute force?
All I want is to put it on a personal scale.
@ ET 7:20
I think the issue is the imminent survival of our way of life. Yes, the Islamic economy probably won’t work once they’ve conquered everyone but like the Sultanate at it’s height they’ll liberalize somewhat. I would also agree that a lot of their science has it’s roots in the Hellenistic tradition. It just goes to show you that they’re flexible.
All that however is moot since they’re having large families and we’re having small ones. We’re just being outbred plain and simple, like the African killer bees who has their queen kill the fun loving North American queens and then just replace their progeny. The workability of their backwards ideology is irrelevant. Thier immediate goal is to dismantle our civilization and then figure out what to do with it later. In a sense they’re pursuing the global caliphate like a dog pursues a car, they’ll be damned if they knew what to do with it but all they know is that they want it. They probably think that they’d take all our shiz and then live like kings, like when the palestinians got back Gaza.
Which goes back to the issue of the Wine and Sausage fest. If we don’t confront them now and possibly roll back their insitutions and influences in our society we’re done. Yes they’re provoking them but so what? The simple fact of the matter is no, as they are they aren’t welcome in our society. I don’t think there is any kind of reconciliation possible.
Also the only ones getting beaten soft right now is us maybe it’s time to return the favor. I’d also probably lose in a real fight, but I’ll bite!
Why do these frickin’ Muslims keep referring to themselves as a RACE? So annoying…
As for “Davenport”, I suspect that’s exactly where most of his real-world experience has taken place, which is why I don’t now nor ever will take him seriously about anything.
+1 to The Phantom – yep, that’s why we have laws, police, armies and so forth.