Op-Ed: Why Arabs are so Easily Offended

“Call me Ishmael”, is the opening sentence that opens the novel “Moby Dick” authored by Herman Melville. Ishmael, who is telling the story of Moby Dick, recounts that he is sailing to sea out of a sense of alienation and cultural inadequacy.

Ever since the days of Napoleon's landing upon the shores of Egypt at the very end of the 18th Century and bringing with him the modern era to the Middle East, Islam has been unable to free itself from the shackles of inferiority and self-destructive primal rage that typifies the hatred of modern day Islamic radicalism against Western civilization.

In recent years, despite Israel being at the foci of much of what has been termed the "war of civilizations" between the Western world and Islam, Europe is undergoing a rapid demographic transition that will lead to a large Muslim population harboring an unchanging, hostile attitude toward their national communities.

Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist who has had extensive experience with treating Muslim youths has identified four main differences that are important in order to understand the behavior of Muslims and how they interact with Western influences. Without dismissing the intrinsic value of multiculturalism or the need to identify with ones cultural roots Sennels has identified four main differences that are important in order to understand the behavior of Muslims. They concern anger, self-confidence, the so-called "locus of control" and identity.

Westerners are brought up to think of anger as a sign of weakness, powerlessness and lack of self-control.

At the time the Brits moved into India the subcontinent was a mess of warring principalities. This is a recurring theme in Indian history ~ empire to warring states to empire to warring states to conquest to warring states to empire ~ and over and over.

Their bad luck to encounter the technologically superior Brits at a time when the princes each felt the Brits could be of use to them.

The Brits are not just the sum of their commercial interests ~ although your typical Indian would like you to think so. They have a grand history of seeking to uplift the poor and extending charity to the oppressed. They even invented what has become modern European democratic forms of government and process.

The East India Tea Company was not a beneficent organization. The true test of an empire’s supposed benevolent motives is when they conflict with their commercial interests. I am not saying that the British Empire was totally bereft of such motives, but they were not what brought them to India, or the North American continent, or anywhere else. In some ways they helped India, such as in eradicating the Thugs and introducing modern medicine and education, but when push came to shove, they massacred Indians, whether Hindus, Sikhs or Moslems, and not so long ago, either. As for the conquest of the Ottomans, that had nothing whatever to do with liberating Arabs or establishing a homeland for Jews.

You dare to call me a phunk biotch?! You blaspheme against the Brophet! You insult the phroud Arab nation! I will have a mob outside your house to drag you into the street and disembowel you, right after we finish disemboweling my neighbor for stealing a leaf off my graphewine! Then our families will feud, and we will phay them money to call it off, then they will kill one of my family and phay the same money back to call off our feud, and the survivors will all gather outside your house and disembowel your infidel a@#. We will make phease between our families just for that.

“The Brits are not just the sum of their commercial interests ~ although your typical Indian would like you to think so. They have a grand history of seeking to uplift the poor and extending charity to the oppressed. They even invented what has become modern European democratic forms of government and process.”

When I read the paragraph, I remember when the day after I came home from the hopsital this recent past summer, and I sat down to watch the opening ceremony to open the 2012 London summer olympics which talked about the contributions the British made both Europe and the world, until I heard Brian Coautus say and in a “jabbing” way to the country the British love to call the (USA) the “nation across the big lake” on the hot debate known as “Obamacare” and the infamous “NHS” when there was a dancing skit of doctors, nurses, and little kids. I was very much put off by that having just come home from the hospital after spending about a week there by it.

At the time, they had an accord with France, Sikes-Picot, in which France would get Syria and Britain would do all the work. So a cabal within the British military and foreign office (Cairo-Khartoum) went about exploiting a loophole in the accord, that the British would not be required to pass territory to France liberated by any indigenous revolts against the Ottomans. The Jews wanted to revolt, because the Ottomans were busily trying to dismantle the Jewish yishuv painstakingly established in the Holy Land over the 19th Century, and slowly over the four preceding centuries. The Turks wanted to expel them all, so they had no choice but to revolt, and found a ready ally in the British. The Arabs were quite happy to remain under the Ottoman boot, but the British manufactured a “revolt” “lead” by Capt. TE Lawrence. Their actual military accomplishment was negligible and strictly for lucre, but the British had the “rebels” advance first into Aqaba and other points of interests that the British had already secured, and called these conquests by an indigenous “revolt”. So The British did their best to screw France out of large chunks of Greater Syria. One large chunk was called a Jewish Homeland, and when France ended up being entitled to what was left of Syria, they gave 70% of this Jewish Homeland to the disappointed Husseinis and called it “Transjordan”. Then they manufactured an anti-Zionist backlash with the help of the Husseini clan (Haj Amin el Husseini), and used that to dampen the whole Jewish Homeland movement, ultimately severely restricting immigration in 1939, and pressuring neutral countries to refuse to accept Jewish refugees for fear they might end up in the Palestine Mandate. Ironically, Haj Amin went with Hitler and nearly lost the war for the British in Iraq when he incited an uprising that somehow failed, followed by a pogrom. So the manipulations of the Cairo-Khartoum cabal to deny the creation of a Jewish Homeland backfired on the British. As for the Jews, many of them went from being loyal subjects to open rebellion, ultimately making the Mandate unmanageable and leading to the creation of the Jewish State.

So yes, the British did create the Jewish State, just as they created the United States and a free India, by pissing off the most capable leaders until they rebelled. But as Lin Yutang says, the Briton is a wonderful fellow, so long as he stays home. He’s educated, democratic, and essentially decent, G-d-fearing and hard working, with a taste for literature and art. When the British had an empire, they did disseminate those values. But ultimately, being an empire for extended centuries makes bastards of even the best of us. The same was true of the ancient Athenians and Romans. As for the Islamic empires, they started out as bastards and remain so to this day, except in the brief periods when they tried not to take their insane religion seriously.

According to Sennels, close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred. In Pakistan, the numbers approach 70%. Even in England, more than half of Pakistani immigrants are married to their first cousins, and in Denmark the number of inbred Pakistani immigrants is around 40%.

The numbers are equally devastating in other important Muslim countries: 67% in Saudi Arabia, 64% in Jordan and Kuwait, 63% in Sudan, 60% in Iraq, and 54% in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.

The risk of having an IQ lower than 70, the official demarcation for being classified as “retarded,” increases by an astonishing 400 percent among children of cousin marriages.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.