VH first gives us some general background on the situation:
Mohammed Redouan Jabri is a Moroccan Dutch (34) and has a job with the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs as a “social investigating officer”. His parents, both Moroccan immigrants, traveled back to Morocco in 1975 so that he could be born there, and then brought him “back” to the land of milk and honey, free money, and freshly-cleansed lebensraum for unemployed Muslim immigrants: the Netherlands.
Jabri is a happy immigrant and one of those enrichments who are of the opinion that the Dutch lack awareness of their history, and view citizenship only as having a Dutch passport. Mohammed Jabri views the Netherlands as a country with “a very sneaky and xenophobic population who can not handle criticism and where foreigners do not know where they stand”.
Mohammed Jabri called Theo van Gogh (when he was still alive) “the pig”, and wrote after the slaughter of Van Gogh: “The murder of Van Gogh leaves us cold. Why is there not more attention for Muslim dead in Chechnya, Palestine or Afghanistan?
If there was any doubt left about his Muslim world-view, Mohammed Jabri is a member of the Committee of Recommendation for Nederland Bekent Kleur [“Netherlands Admits Color”] of the notorious Fortuyn-hater, Wilders-hater, anti-Semite, and subsidy sponge, the Left-wing extremist and a fifth column on his own, René Danen. Jabri put his signature on the Anti-Wilders list of the same René Danen, in support of the upcoming court case against Wilders, and wants see both Wilders and the PVV silenced. Freedom of opinion is not for the Dutch, but for himself and Tariq Ramadan.
In April 2009 he co-initiated — with the usual left-wing traitors and feminists like the anti-Semite Anja Meulenbelt (Socialist Party Senator) and other suspects — the committee known as Support Tariq to help Tariq Ramadan in his “struggle” against the “ongoing smear campaign against him”, and last week wrote a column in support of Ramadan, or better, threatened a few prominent Ramadan critics in his article A Dirty Game!. One may wonder whether he also speaks and threatens at the behest of Ramadan.
VH’s first translation is from Stan de Jong:
Mohammed Jabri is angry, and then just can’t help but threaten- - - - - - - - -
Mohammed Jabri is no longer capable of handling the sacking of Tariq Ramadan. On the [immigrant] blog “Wij Blijven Hier” [“We are staying here”], he announces his uncivilized behavior: “[Afshin] Ellian, [Leon] De Winter, [Paul] Cliteur, Erasmus University in Rotterdam and the city council, all of them have with the resignation of Tariq Ramadan — and their involvement therein — placed a new bomb under the social debate. A debate that has long since ceased being a debate but a unilateral proclamation of how inferior Muslims are. Afshin Ellian, Leon de Winter and the entire Rotterdam city council apparently do not want a civilized debate, but just foul play. Well, they can get that. Muslims should forget that eternal urge to prove how civilized we can be by responding to this in a very politically correct way. We know by now just how civilized we can be. And if your Dutch neighbor really wants the best for you, then he will know this by now, too. Afshin Ellian and Leon de Winter, however, should not expect civilized behavior when I run up against them. And I will run up against them.”
Jabri apparently wants to stay here, and at the same time wants to venture into the mode of Middle East. Thus, expressing your opinion by being uncivilized.
Unless better readers than I distill any different interpretation, I think that Jabri finally means to say here that once he runs up against Afshin Ellian and Leon de Winter, he will not behave in a civilized way.
Now uncivilized behavior is not unique among our fellow immigrants, and many types of behavior can be defined amongst them. A more specific interpretation of this would therefore not be an unnecessary luxury, because Afshin Ellian and Leon de Winter perhaps find themselves in the dark about what precisely is intended with that “uncivil behavior”.
Or maybe we should assume that it is just threatening? Or intimidation? Or perhaps a call for others to behave in an uncivilized fashion towards Afshin Ellian and Leon de Winter? In that case, that uncivilized behavior might get out of control.
Whatever this uncivilized behavior may be, it quite seems that Jabri cannot deal with thinkers like Afshin Ellian and Leon de Winter in line with the generally prevailing principles of civilization, and will thus run up against them with uncivilized behavior.
Because when you say: “And I will run up against them,” it does not seem an assumption, but a certainty, one that will occur.
And, well, what can you do then, being Afshin Ellian or Leon de Winter?
Here is the large part of Mohammed Jabri’s column:
A Dirty Game!
By Mohammed Jabri
In contrast with Erasmus University, the University of Oxford published a statement in which it is said that Tariq Ramadan will remain welcome at Oxford as a professor. The reason: Oxford university realizes that it is in a democracy, where freedom of expression must be guaranteed, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. That is the way it works in a civilized democracy. The content and color of the opinion does not matter. What matters is that it can be justified and discussed. But in the heads of Rotterdammers it apparently works differently.
Ramadan costs a lot of money. The municipality of Rotterdam took him on to start building bridges, and decided, after consideration, to accept the wages that Ramadan demanded for his services. Nothing wrong with that, you’d think. It is a matter of supply and demand. The need has been there since the first Muslim came walking into this country, because the Dutch people have in their DNA an ill-disposed response to alien matters. The supply fluctuates and currently there is a scarcity. Tariq Ramadan is almost the only one in Europe who has the capability to do what he does. Of course, there is other talent in formation, but it has yet to emerge. To those who want to know what he does, I recommend reading his books or just visiting one of his lectures. If you’re not interested in it, that’s fine, but then keep your mouth shut, especially on Tariq Ramadan.
Ellian suffers from a post-Khomeini syndrome, and pollutes the Dutch landscape with it. De Winter is an ordinary Zionist who by definition puts everything into question where the letter “M” appears and already screams “anti-Semitism!” when on your vacation in Haifa you do not smile at an Israeli lamp post. And Paul Cliteur, ah… that is pretty much parallel to Hans Jansen: because you call yourself an Arabist and are educated in the linguistic acrobatics of an Arab, you then sell yourself as Islam expert. Something like a snack bar, which suddenly starts interfering with any potato meal that exists, fried or not.
In the past they have been lucky that there were too many activists and too few intellectuals. So they have been able to do a little image building. Dyab Abou Jahjah [the Hizbollah volunteer of the Arab European League, of the Holocaust cartoons and anti Jewish riots in Antwerp —translator] for example, who has been in a discussion with all three gentlemen, and of course is very good in a debate, could deal with them somewhat but still remains an activist. And eventually did chat to them intellectually under the table. Smart guy, that Dyab. [Theo van Gogh called him “The Prophet’s Pimp” when Jahjah walked out a debate. —translator] But no intellectual. Tariq Ramadan, however, is one. He has chatted with many opponents under the table at an intellectual level. But with respect for those who took against him. You need only to be a bundle of vanity like poor old Frits Bolkestein who tried it recently. Hat off to Frits and his efforts. Your best was unfortunately not good enough.
The three musketeers of extremist atheism — Ellian, Cliteur, and De Winter — do not deserve that respect. They do not enter into a debate with Tariq Ramadan, but only paint him black. This has been done long enough to the Rotterdam city council, until it put the Erasmus University under pressure to dismiss Ramadan. This is the bottom line:
Tariq Ramadan says something, and some people disagree with it. They do not debate, but paint him black. On the basis of lies and ridiculous assumptions Tariq Ramadan has been dismissed. Certainly not based on facts and truths. This says nothing about Tariq Ramadan. It says everything about the “counter party”. This counter-party is full of how democratic freedoms must be defended everywhere and always. This counter-party has now raised itself as the regime of a banana republic. You know, the kind of country where your life is worth less than a potato if you find things that are not viewed well by that regime. In the Netherlands we are world champions at giving it out to countries like that. We say “that it cannot be that you can not say what you think”. Now Tariq Ramadan has not been not physically addressed. No, what happens is actually much worse. Apart from the denial of Tariq Ramadan’s economic rights — that he offers work for which he is paid and that he on the basis of falsehoods loses those rights — the name of Tariq Ramadan once again was pulled through the mud, as if he actually has done something that is totally unacceptable. While the opposite is true.
You read and talk about it with all kinds of people, with supporters and opponents. Only the sane ones know that Tariq Ramadan has been tricked here. In that dirty dark room in Bloemendaal, the house of Leon de Winter, there has been a toast to the victory over the yoke of Islam in the Netherlands. Intellectual opposition is cleared out of the way. Not with a sound and valid debate, but with lies and deceit. And, oh, who cares, the end justifies the means. As a Muslim you are provoked to the depths of your heart. The falsehood makes me so angry. It is unjust. You try to remain civilized, by thinking that the self-appointed guardians of democracy, in which you expect that the freedom of expression after November 2, 2004 [murder of Theo van Gogh] is valid for everybody, protect you against those who put those freedoms under pressure. We all know better, but on the surface you may imagine yourself in that security.
Ellian, De Winter, Cliteur, the Erasmus University in Rotterdam and the city council, all of them have with the resignation of Tariq Ramadan — and their involvement therein — placed a new bomb under the social debate. A debate that has long since ceased being a debate but a unilateral proclamation of how inferior Muslims are. Afshin Ellian, Leon de Winter and the entire Rotterdam city council apparently do not want a civilized debate, but just foul play. Well, they can get that. Muslims should forget that eternal urge to prove how civilized we can be by responding to this in a very politically correct way. We know by now just how civilized we can be. And if your Dutch neighbor really wants the best for you, then he will know this by now, too. Afshin Ellian and Leon de Winter, however, should not expect civilized behavior when I run up against them. And I will run up against them. [emphasis added]