From The Autonomist blog:
Although I’m weak in anthropology, I did get an ‘A’ in biology years ago, and what I learned has given me insight into these strange organisms we call Middle Eastern Muslims. Every organism alive on the planet is good at something. Each has some sort of defense or capability or behavior that gave them an edge over other organisms of past eras and allowed them to evolve to overcome life’s challenges and survive to this day.
Rabbits are fast runners and fast breeders. Tigers are amazingly skilled hunting machines. Elephants are immensely tough and powerful. Monkeys are highly intelligent and adaptable. Frogs have poisonous skin.
But Muslims, like the stick bug and the chameleon and the stone fish, have developed, to an amazing extent, the ability to deceive. And it is that ability that confounds their environmental competitors (you and me) the most.
These types of organisms — “lie-in-wait” predators — must know the full range of behaviors of the organisms they wish to defeat, so as to position themselves correctly for the strike. They are not necessarily strong or powerful, so they must know what frightens, arouses, lures, relaxes, and weakens that which they intend to destroy. For the Muslim, the idea is to exploit our greatest vulnerability — PC thinking.
The Autonomist points out that our narrow Politically Correct and Wildly Wrong (my term, not his) Thinking has left our jugular vein open for a good bite in any interaction we happen to have with Middle East Muslims. He draws on his own maddening experience as a contractor in Iraq for examples of daily taqiyya. Not only do they do it to us, they lie and lie and lie to one another. It’s simply part of the air they breathe:
They hone these deceptive traits by practicing on themselves, first and foremost, by perfecting the art that most Westerners would call “lying.” But to them it’s not really lying. To them, lying is simply the most effective means at their disposal for saving face, being clever, getting ahead, and trying to appear superior. Remember, deception is the Muslim’s most developed trait; their secret weapon. Its constant exercise is not a matter of shame, it’s a matter of pride.
And they absolutely drool at the sight of an unsuspecting Westerner who waltzes into their midst, like the juicy beetle oblivious to the chameleon, with his Christian-based ideas of “Truth” and “honesty” and “ethics” and “integrity.” From Alexander the Great to the 101st Airborne, the first thing the Arabs saw was not our frightening array of weapons, but the big “Tootsie Pop” signs stenciled on our foreheads.
That doesn’t excuse them in my book. Cultural relativity be damned. Chronic, imbedded dishonesty is not only wrong, it is destructive, and it results in chaos. Moral chaos, political chaos, and cultural sinks. As he points out, regarding agreements (and never mind covenants. That would be an order of magnitude beyond the comprehension of the people he deals with:
…in the Middle East, there is no such thing as an Agreement. Whether a verbal commitment or a look straight in the eye or firm handshake or even a written contract, these things here are worth next to nothing. Rather than organizing or finalizing anything, these acts merely serve as a continuation of the struggle by one party to screw the other party more than they plan on getting screwed themselves. Accomplishing a given task, taking pride in one’s work, achieving competence, and even basic concepts of economic gain through mutual trade, take a far back seat to the massive satisfaction gained by getting something more out of someone else then they get from you.
After pointing out his own experiences with the lying, lying, lying Iraqis and Kuwatis, the Autonomist asks why we’d ever believe that “diplomacy” works in this region, why we would be brain-dead enough (my term) to want to negotiate with these predators. Then he gives us a quiz to consider:
Let’s take a quiz:
Q: Why are there no democracies in the Muslim Middle East?
A: Democracies are based on the possibility of mutually held Agreements between people. Democracy is unsustainable in cultures where lying is acceptable and constant.
Q: Why is every Muslim Middle Eastern country characterized by either rigid oppression or chaotic violence?
A: The coercive use of violence is the only way to ensure Muslims in the Middle East will live up to any obligations, including basic social order and function. Middle East countries where chaos currently reigns, like Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan, are merely examples of what Muslims are like without coercion.
Q: How is it that intelligence gathering by Western powers, whether it is about the weapons capabilities of an entire nation, or the simple location of a lone thug, is so constantly stymied and duped in the Middle East?
A: The job of intelligence gatherers is to determine the truth. I wouldn’t take that job in the Middle East for all the money in Michael Moore’s Halliburton stocks.
Q: Have you ever seen anything that says “Made in Saudi Arabia”? What was the last thing invented or produced by Middle Eastern Muslims that helped advance humankind? Why are they so incompetent at virtually everything?
A: Although some individuals with quality talents certainly exist here, it would be impossible to gather enough in one place to Agree to cooperate in any sort of complex or significant effort. The only time Muslims can stick together long enough to produce anything en masse, like nuclear missiles for Uncle Mah, is under the threat of force.
Q: Why is it that Muslim leaders can stare the world in the eye and lie through their teeth without even flinching?
A: They’re not lying, they are “negotiating” with people they assume to be complete suckers.
Q: Are they right?
A: Good question
Finished the quiz? Still got that Tootsie pop on your forehead? Anyone that does will make a nice lunch for some Muslim.
That includes you, Dr. Rice.
Hat tip: The American Thinker
Last night, I started a thread in the Discuss section of the Swedish site http://www.thelocal.se ; the thread was called “The Danger of Censorship about Islam.” A poster named Cyberfluff was a bit exasperated at my writings about the dangers of Islamic immigration and asked what I wanted HER to do. I told her I’d be back; and I was, with a multiparagraph essay that seems to have resulted in my being banned from the site. (Note the name of the thread I started!)
Could someone (a) see if the thread and my response is still there; and if not (b) find Cyberfluff (who posts here and there on that site) and ask her to see my response below. Gates of Vienna is a new kind of Radio Free Europe. Thanks.
in response to your request, here are the four things that i want you to do:
(a) Read the anti-jihadi works: the web sites listed earlier (to which you can add http://wolfgangbruno.blogspot.com/ ) and an increasing number of books (authors include spencer, bawer, bostom, bat y’eor, fallaci, ibn warraq, trifkovic, and karsh).
(b) Rediscover what is being lost (and which Islam is threatening to replace, to our detriment). C.S. Lewis and a local church might re-introduce you to Christianity, for example, and with it a desire to take the radical step that native europeans are not doing: having children and raising them in a stable family, which implies caring about what is happening to your society today and what is likely to happen in future generations.
(c) Find a way to contribute to the anti-jihadi movement. i gather that some of the books that speak to the european experience (from bawer, bat y’eor, and fallaci) are not always available in europe, either because they have not been translated or because … well, in italy, they want to ARREST fallaci! it would be good if you could militate against those kind of restrictions and help get the word out, perhaps as a translator, perhaps as a columnist; whatever your skills, help the cause of the West.
(d) Support a political party that stands up to Islam. Fjordman (whose writings are here http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Fjordman60328.htm and here http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/ ) tells a story of horror for Sweden, a country of increasing rape and robbery. (Why do you shrug off the worsening situation for women, as caused by young immigrant males who consider themselves — in keeping with the model for Muslim behavior — to be waging a war?) Fjordman suggests that there is no political party in Sweden that is worthy of support — in France, there is Mouvement Pour La France, for example — but maybe you can help force a debate about immigration. (Alas, you are already in a situation where fulfilling that request will put you in physical danger; but of course, the continued immigration and acceptance of Islam as an equal of Christianity will only make the horror worse.)
In closing, let me report to you how Fjordman sees it:
“Sweden is a semi-totalitarian country. It’s all about façade. On the surface, Sweden is a tolerant nation and peaceful democracy. In reality, there is massive media censorship by a closed elite that is scared of having a debate about immigration. There are even physical attacks on critics of immigration by Leftist extremists, something which has been largely ignored and thus quietly approved by the establishment, until it now even targets parties in Parliament. No dissent is tolerated. Opinion polls have revealed that two out of three Swedes doubt whether Islam can be combined with Swedish society, and a very significant proportion of the population have for years wanted more limitations in immigration. Yet not one party represented in the Swedish Parliament is genuinely critical of the Multicultural society or the current immigration policies. The Swedish elite congratulate themselves that they have managed to keep ‘xenophobic’ parties from gaining a foothold while the country is sinking underneath their feet. No, Mr. Jagland, we have nothing to learn from Sweden except hypocrisy to perfection. We should study them only in trying to avoid letting them drag us down with them when they fall, which they will.”
[ another poster (Mahmood) then asked why the Europeans don’t take action; and I answered as follows. ]
Mahmood, that’s a good question. Let me quote from Fjordman again:
“It’s getting urgent. When enough people feel that the system isn’t working anymore and that the social contract has been breached, the entire fabric of the democratic society could unravel. What happens when the welfare state system breaks down, and there is no longer enough money to “grease” the increasing tensions between immigrants and native Europeans? And what happens when people discover that their own leaders, through the EU networks and the Euro-Arab Dialogue described by Bat Ye’or in her book “Eurabia,” have been encouraging all these Muslims to settle here in the first place? There will be massive unemployment, and tens of millions of people will feel angry, scared and humiliated, betrayed by the system, by society and by their own democratic leaders. This is a situation in some ways similar to the Great Depression that led to the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s. Is this where we’re heading once again, with fear, rising Fascism and political assassinations? The difference is that the “Jewish threat” in the 1930s was entirely fictional, whereas the “Islamic threat” now is very real. However, precisely the trauma caused by the events 70 years ago is clouding our judgment this time, since any talk at all about the threat posed by Muslim immigration or about preserving our own culture is being dismissed as “just like the rhetoric used against Jews by the Nazis.” Europeans have been taught to be so scared of our own shadow that we are incapable of seeing that darkness can come from the outside, too. Maybe Europe will burn again, in part as a belated reaction to the horrors of Auschwitz.”
Automonist is right on the money… RIGHT ON THE MONEY!
In the headlines right now is a perfect example:
Iran has provided a “concession” on the nuclear issue. From Fox News website, “Iran says nuke program inspections can resume if its case is removed from the Security Council.”
Let us rephrase this – Iran says that they will allow inspections to resume as long as the issue will no longer be debated by the UN Security Council. This of course is the same (the only) UN Security Council that is the only portion of the LAME UN that could potentially enact even dull, short-toothed sanctions on Iran.
The final iteration of restating this deal is, “Come watch us build The Bomb after you have promised (you gullible, trustworthy westerners) that you will do nothing to stop us.
What a deal. Kinda’ like laying down $30,000 in cash to purchase that brand new car and you pull up in the driveway at home in the same old jalopy you took to the dealer to trade in.
Well, this was made in Saudi-Arabia.
But, then again, they might think it was good for humankind…
I couldn’t find the thread on the Sweedish site.
I take that back, I looked again, and I found it. But I’m not registered, so I couldn’t post a note to Cyberfluff directing her to this website for your response.
But, the entire tone of the thread seemed to be that anyone who suggested that Sweeden’s culture, polity and society might be injured by the enormous numbers of Muslim immigrants, was immediately mocked, trivialized, and “answered” by effeminate, glib jests.
Sweeden has had it good for so long, they they’ve become conditioned to believe that their lifestyle and culture will just go on, and on, and on.
They’re not grounded in history.
Whereas we are.
Churchill was derided as some lost prophet of doom by his opponents. The same glib remark that we meet with, Churchill met before us, and Demosthenes as well, all the way back in antiquity. Mockery and ridicule are their way of AVOIDING a confrontation on the merits, a discussion on the points at issue, an argument that deals with the essentials, instead of the marginal.
It’s a defense mechanism.
While Noah was building the ark, scripture tells us that neighbors from far and wide would come, just for amusement sake, to see this great ark rising up, far away from any body of water.
We’re in good company.
Of course it doesn’t make it any easier to deal with, and it only increases the frustration we feel, because we are cursed with eyes that gaze across decades and centuries, while they live for the moment. But as Churchill’s warnings were made good by subsequent provocations and outrages by Hitler, so too will our words be made good by muslims themselves.
Sad, but very true.
While I have no first hand experience with Muslims (other than to say hello or goodby) I agree with the essay Rocco DiPippo posted. I also know that I have read all of that before in the many books that I have read about Islam, Arabs and Muslims.
The condensed version (while incomplete), is a good thing for those that have not been reading those books these last 4-5 years.
I’ve written about this before, though some time ago. The gist is that Islam doesn’t allow for anything so trivial as secualr truth. To do so would be shirk, the attribution of more than one god, of idolatry. Allah is the one and only source of truth; therefore, if Allah wills it, it is true; if Allah does not will it, there is no truth.
Consider this: If Allah is not directly involved in x, e.g. the price of a bottle of soda, then to say the bottle of soda is y is the same as to say the price of the bottle of soda is z. It’s not important in the life of Islam vis-a-vis Allah. There simply is no truth at all outside Allah. Therefore, whatever goes on outside the concerns of Allah, the Islamic orthopraxies of the broken day, is comtemptible. Allah doesn’t care about what one says of the price of a bottle of soda. Nor does Allah care about anything much of anything other than the daily rituals of Islam. What isn’t forbidden is permitted.
And that’s the truth.