Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Answer to a Moderate Mohammedan

Most readers are familiar with the work of our expatriate Dutch correspondent H. Numan, who publishes occasional reports and guest-essays here. As it happens, he also posts from time to time at the popular Dutch site Het Vrije Volk. Below is a recent essay which was kindly translated by our Flemish correspondent VH.

Answer to a moderate Mohammedan
by H. Numan

A few days ago a moderate Muslim made a clean breast of it. It appeared that he was not so moderate after all. On which forum this happened is not so important, nor who precisely that moderate Muslim was. The essence is that the moderate Muslim always kept himself somewhat aloof when a bit of an attitude was not quite unimportant.

The Fortuyn murder? “I was not dancing in the street.” Indeed, but expressing your disapproval would have done much good. Moroccans who grab ladies’ purses, rob old pensioners, rape or pimp white girls? “Those are but a few marginal figures.”

At one time though, he became really angry at the forum. He found it insulting that Mohammed was being compared with a pedophile. Not Mohammed B. [Bouyeri, the murderer of Van Gogh], who gets hot about more amputations, but “the” Mohammed.

Well, I really would not know what else to call an old boss of 50 who takes the virginity of a girl of 9. You can hardly call him a bath superintendent. So can I call him a difficult lifeguard? Then the word from on high came down: we had to know our place, because they would be ruling this land soon anyway. Furthermore, he had a few airheaded anti-Semitic comments on Prof. Bob Smalhout [a columnist for newspaper De Telegraaf, who also writes critically on the appeasement and Islamization]: “Who takes a dirty Jew like him now seriously?”

This was my reply. An answer that fully applies to nearly all moderate Moslems. Therefore, I slightly adjusted it (all references to the Moslem and the forum have been removed):

I think, moderate Moslem, that you are mistaken in the forum. This is our forum, not the Al Sunnah website. I’m glad that you have shown what you are. Everything but moderately so. And it is quite funny that I almost immediately thought so. From your first few posts you did not seem a moderate to me. This forum is not intended to win souls for your pedophile prophet and his self-invented religion. Don’t become angry: All religions are invented. By people. This prophet of yours has done about everything that all religions prohibit. Ever heard of the “golden rule”? Christianity claims to have invented that. Nonsense. Every thoughtful man and every society applies it; it is again: treat others the way you would want like to be treated yourself.

Would you enjoy it if the Dutch were to behave as Muslims do here, but in your country? No? Why then do you misbehave like that? Misbehaving in a broader sense than the rape of girls, committing “honor” crimes, and robbing old pensioners. I guess you are not doing that (I hope). Misbehaving is also offensive behavior. As in the provocative wearing of headscarves, burkas, burkinis, trudging around in dresses, growing filthy little beards and hissing to the Dutch that you, vulgar barbarians, will soon be ruling here. If that is your culture, just do that at home. At home in Morocco. Not here.
- - - - - - - - -
What do you expect yourself? You live in a country where the vast majority want absolutely nothing to do with your religion. Not to mention your presence, as being Moroccan. You have reached the impossible in 40 years time. There is not one marketing or advertising agency that is prepared to try to improve the image of Moroccans even with an unlimited budget. The cities of the Hague and Tilburg were the last ones to offer an almost unlimited budget. No agency dared to take the challenge. This is an achievement. To have such a phenomenally bad image you must really have done something.

Are the Dutch or I racist? Far from it. I myself am a guest worker. Therefore I know very well what is expected of us guests. You all apparently not. You assume that everything and everyone must adapt to you. Well, that is not the way things work. Guests must adapt to the host. This is called being “polite”. I smoke, but when I visit someone who does not smoke, I of course refrain form smoking. Courtesy. I have no dietary restrictions, but if I had them, I would solve that problem myself. This does not mean to demand with a big mouth that ham sandwiches should not be served.

I find your religion completely ridiculous and utterly insane. And you are aware of that. Except in this forum I will not soon show that to a Moslem. A matter of courtesy. In like manner, I am not in no way prepared to change my behavior or eating habits because you resent them. That’s just a matter of bad luck. If you or another Muslim (unlikely, but just in case) are my guest, you really do not have to eat a ham sandwich. Cheese sandwich? Sorry, cheese is very expensive here. I can’t afford that, and if something is that expensive I will certainly not serve it to a thankless arrogant vulgar barbarian. Jam sandwich, then? Glass of water instead of a beer there?

The true Muzzelman [old Dutch for Muslim] finds that not good enough though. No ham for him? Then nobody gets ham! No beer for him? Then no beer for anyone! Nice. Just go for it. In your own country, to be precise. Or, as long as you — yet — live here, in your own home. Demanding this kind of idiocy in a TV talk show would not work with me. Were I the TV host, I would burn you out completely on the spot. That would have been fun if the hosts Pauw and Witteman had been named Numan. And then interviewing the incumbent attorney. [There is always wine presented to the guests of the TV hosts Pauw and Witteman. Not so when the Rotterdam Moslem Enait was once their guest: he successfully demanded that the wine disappear. — translator]

Or as the Alderman of University Catering in a city I would’ve said: Just Drop Dead. Bring your own sandwiches if you don’t appreciate what we’re serving here. And do not come up with the with dried-out argument that the poor Jews also suffered from it, monsieur the virulent anti-Semite. The only thing you want is to gas the Jews. What strikes me is that almost all of you without exception are vile anti-Semites of the most extreme kind — except when it comes to in handy on your own patch. I have yet to come across Moslems, moderate or not, who do not instantly come up with the words “Zionist” and “world conspiracy” the very minute Israel or Jews are mentioned.

By adapting yourself (generalizing, applies to all Muslims) a tiny bit you would simply have no problem at all here. Dutch are pretty open, and tolerate a lot of idiocy. Where you really get things quite wrong is to understand that as a sign of weakness. We don’t want trouble or misery. Most people are willing to accept your rudeness and arrogance, because the game is not worth the candle. Up to a certain limit, that is. And you have managed to exceed that limit by far about now. There will be a reaction coming your way. That is Wilders.

Just wait until he is elected, and then it will really become hot under your slippers, kid. Then it’s harvest time. You then may reap what you have sown for the past 40 years. I am sure that next year, after Wilders has become PM, you (and you may be first) are going to lament that you really want to adapt. If you are only given a little time. Wilders will then rightly say: “Sorry fellas. You had 40 years’ time, and you wasted it. That pretext we already have heard for 40 years. Just get out now.”

What I find funny is the way you show your contempt. “You will soon discover who the boss is here.” And some Mohammedan anti-Semitic posturing. Do really think we are stupid? Why do you think Wilders gets that many votes? Because you, you moderate little Mohammedans, are hissing such things all day. Suppose I came along to your place, and then started crapping on the flag of Morocco, and used your Koran to wipe my rear? Are we still friends? No? But that is very normal though, isn’t it? But aren’t you doing nothing else day after day? A clear indication that you have no idea whatsoever what you are doing.


Gregory said...

All of this article was way too intellectual for a muslim. You got to stop addressing them in intellect above an 8th grader. It just don't sink into their simple way of thinking...."it does not compute"...
And the wests liberal left won't get it either...There is only one answer.

Winston the Smithy said...

It does seem that you get the ignorant ones. I ended up getting into a long 5 email debate with a Muslim, who certainly knew his Islam and asked me to remove a comment on Muhammad being a paedophile because he stated that Aisha was 19, not nine and that the hadiths of Abu-Dawud and Sahih Bukhari were not respected and thus wrong, going on to quote Abdur Rahman ibn Arabi al-Zinad, Ibn Jarir at-Tabari and Sayyid Sulayman Nadvi.

There is much debate in the Muslim world of whose teachings to believe and at the moment they are greatly trying to denounce the teachings of Abu-Dawud and Sahih Bukhari.

The Destruction of Britain

laine said...

Unless Muslims themselves come up with some fool proof way of separating their "moderate" selves from the supremacists, it is merely self-defense for non Muslims to assume the worst. Given takiya and other koranic directions on how to fool kaffir to gain strategic advantage for Allah, mere words or signed declarations as to one's moderation are useless. Perhaps if they're backed with the promise of forfeiture of property?

When push comes to shove, how many "moderate" Muslims would hide infidels from Islamists intent on jailing or exterminating them? A good guess is not one in a thousand judging by how infidels are treated by ALL MUSLIMS in Muslim dominated countries and by how Muslim immigrants treat host populations as soon as they achieve some surprisingly low critical mass, as little as 3 or 4% of the population.

Devout Muslims are taught from babyhood that infidels are vermin unless they convert. They are to be converted by force, killed or treated as dhimmi/ second class citizens with few rights, none immutable and obliged to pay tax to their masters for the privilege of breathing.

Scratch a "moderate" Muslim and you will find the desire to be ruled by sharia, for supremacy of Islam around the world, and corrosive antisemitism or all three. Another tell tale is that their Golden Rule applies exclusively to other Muslims.

It is only the Muslims who denounce all these secret agendas publicly (at some risk to themselves) who are trustworthy and you can count those on the fingers of one hand for each country (Wafa Sultan, Salim Mansur, Tarek Fatah, Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq come to mind). Most of the denouncers declare themselves apostates or are considered such by the umma so really, it's likely theologically IMPOSSIBLE to be a moderate Muslim by any Western definition and remain in good standing with Islamic authorities.

Why do Westerners not insist that this point be clarified by the highest authorities as a preliminary to suspending Muslim immigration? Instead of Western presidents and Archbishops demonstrating their deep ignorance of Islam by presenting it as some peaceful faith instead of the most warlike throughout its history, start publishing what the honest Islamic authorities say, those who just can't contain their supremacy and premature victory dances.

Westward Ho said...

Laine asked:
"When push comes to shove, how many "moderate" Muslims would hide infidels from Islamists intent on jailing or exterminating them?"

This is a particularly interesting point, I feel. For this may be the situation of the next generation of some Europeans, literally.

Seeing the mercilessness of the ummah's enforcers upon the infidels, apostates, etc in the Muslim ruled society, they (muslims) cannot possibly oppose that to help the infidel. For the horror of that force is no skin off their back. So long as they remain muslim. And don't deliberately rock the boat. Only a fool would tamper with such fire. Sorry neighbor, but that's life. You see, me and my kin are unaffected by it. And the punishment that will come down on me and mine is unspeakable were I to stand in opposition to it. Besides, all *you* and your kin have to do is "revert" and join with the victors. I kind of wish it weren't this way, but I have no power to change it. Do not seek help here again.

Even the most nominal muslim, such as one born into a liberal westernized irreligious Islam background can sigh as the terror eddies around him, never touching him, for he is insured against its touch. It is limited to the infidel. What a shame, he may even remark, as he does nothing, ever.

This is the scary dynamic. A marginal part of me doesn't completely blame the muslim individual of that scenario for not committing suicide (by hiding the infidel neighbor). However that has nothing to do with the absolute certainty that they must be stopped.