The following comment, to a post on Gates of Vienna, about Geert Wilders calling for the Koran to be banned, led to this post.
The Dutch banned the first book published in Holland warning of the impending Islamic invasion of the Netherlands.
"The Downfall of The Netherlands: Land of the Naive Dupes" viewable online here:
This was in 1990.
So they do ban some books.
Those by a Cassandra especially.
They hate someone telling them they're wrong.
Even if it kills them.”
The book/pamphlet was written by a Muslim Pakistani immigrant to the Netherlands, so we must assume he knows what he’s talking about. In this post I publish only extracts from the book. Just these extracts are a substantial amount of reading – but worth it. Even so, I recommend you go to the above link and read it in its entirety, though the extracts are enough for reasonably comprehensive coverage. The English language use is sometimes a little awkward to fully appreciate what’s being said, but that is, I believe, because the author is a Pakistani writing in Dutch, which was then translated into English. The author is talking of the Netherlands; I would like to suggest that much as I – British – can see Britain in the same light, so too should all Europeans, Canadians, Australians, Americans, and others, be able to see their own countries this way too. Wherever you see reference to the Netherlands, or the Dutch, try substituting your own country or your own people: it still makes perfect sense. The fact that it was written in 1990 tells me only that the Netherlands are in a more advanced stage of Islamification than the rest of us. Thus far, where the Netherlands have been and are, we are going or have gone … unless we bring it to a halt.
This book perfectly illustrates, by virtue of its author, that when we oppose Islam we are not opposing a skin colour, we are opposing an ideology. The issue is not one of which race you belong to, but rather what thoughts, ideas, values and attitudes bounce around inside your skull.
As an answer to accusations of “Racism” that inevitably follow criticism of Islam I would ask: what “Race”, exactly, is Islam? Or Muslims? Is it West Asian Arab? Or possibly South Asian Pakistani? Oriental Malaysian? How about Somali or Nigerian negro? Perhaps it is European white Bosnian or Albanian?
Can only white European Germans be Nazi? Or white European Slav Russians be Communist? Exactly!
It is not a Race, it is an ideology.
In the extracts that follow, all emphases are mine.
The Downfall of the Netherlands
Land of the Naive Fools
Translation courtesy of Faust
Foreword by the translator
On December 16, 1992 the Pakistani cabaret artist Zoka F. was ordered to pay a sum of 2000 guilders. The Dutch judge ruled that it had been proven that his book, 'De ondergang van Nederland', published under the pseudonym 'Mohammed Rasoel' was a racist pamphlet written with the sole purpose of inciting hatred. This sentence was followed by a massive public display of political correctness with the book being taken from the shelves in most bookstores throughout the Netherlands, and quickly forgotten about.
When the political and social circumstances started to turn against him, the Muslim born author fled his Islamic country, after which he traveled for several years before finding refuge in Europe. Because he lived two lives, of which the second one was in the Netherlands, he observed the Dutch and their charming behavior, misplaced optimism, and disorientated urge for responsibility from an angle where they themselves were blind.
The author shows that the Dutch, if they don't adjust their policy regarding Muslims and set a drastically different course, will be repressed by the culture of Islam. In a worst-case scenario, they will have to admit they literally gave their already small country away. The author sheds light on the subject from different sides and clarifies with many examples that a seemingly far-fetched speculation is actually already materializing in the foreseeable future.
Whosoever reads the references to the evolution of mankind, to the argument about various forms of discrimination, and to the naivety of the Dutch, as well as the detailed explanations regarding the mentality of the Muslims, illustrated with quotes from the Koran, "Though if they oppose you, then kill them," shall not only reconsider their own position in society opposed to the Muslims, but also look differently at the reflection in the mirror, this time with the eyes of the author, who possibly, because he basically writes against himself, could be seen as truly objective. As a side note, the author kept his true identity and location confidential, afraid to make the same mistake as author Salman Rushdie.
My knowledge of human behavior and the differences between populations can not only be contributed to twenty years of interest and an equal amount of visited countries, but also because of a monkey I used to have. A companion who taught me that for some things no difficult explanations are required. A comrade who, when placed in front of a mirror, was at first excited to see a fellow monkey, to look behind the mirror to find out where it was, unable to realize how empty mirrors really are. Though I, when it comes to aforementioned insights and the writing of this book, have the assumed benefit that I'm not a Dutchman, I write strengthened by the knowledge that this book only depicts what many oppressed and silenced Dutchmen think. I must also add that I, as a completely independent person, have no ties to Dutch, Islamic, or any other organization of any kind.
In this book I will give the impression that I generalize continuously, and possibly that I'm convinced of myself being right. The scope of this book is so all encompassing that I, to avoid a monotony of 'besides' and 'according to me', categorized various peoples with a common 'they', without meaning every single one of those people, and expressed frank opinions, without entitling myself to being absolutely right. It may seem awkward that I oppose my own kind; but that's not so strange. After all, when the governments wants to build a railroad straight through Woensdrecht one can expect the village to protest, but it would only be truly objective if the construction company itself would object.
My early years
I was born from average Muslim parents in an average Muslim nation to live a life and do things unexceptional for a random half-blind person lost in Islam, kicking, screaming, and bullying, just like the other Muslims.
… At school they broke quite a few switches on my knuckles, and at home perhaps even more, until my father found out one day that I had tried to smoke and wanted to punish me so severely he hired someone for the extra beating. But why should I complain? The boy next doors didn't hear me shout from four houses away like I heard him when he was beaten for stealing meat from the pan. I also endured less than the christian who murmured English to himself, which the children found so amusing they threw stones at him wherever he went. He bled continuously, not I. On the other hand he was one of the many exceptions like the crippled, retards, and blind who weren't spared either … Dogs busy heaving intercourse and hence attached to each other, rarely finished the ride; they were taken care of by the men, women, and children of the neighborhood, who found the display so repulsive that they simply bashed in the dogs' skulls with sticks. How much sympathy can a whining dog expect from a people too busy whining themselves?
… But always fresh and on guard was our ability to lie. At school, at home, or on the street. Everywhere the lie was the basis of our daily lives. If we were asked for directions, our name, what kind of work our father did, how we paid for something, if we came with the bus, if we were hungry, even if a doctor asked where it hurt; on each question you came up with a fitting lie. Not only because lying had become a second nature, but because we often had started to believe in our own lies without realizing that we lied, but also our fear to lose prestige. We depleted our family members quickly because we used their deaths as an excuse for being late. But afterwards the dead family members praised us for our ingenuity when it came to lying.
… bribery and being smart were one and the same, since only a fool wouldn't bribe a police officer if he could avoid prison time for some spare change. Rich people didn't get into these situations because a police officer who made the mistake of fining a rich person for something like speeding had the following options: fall on his knees and apologize, lose his job, or his nose. The people who didn't have to be rich to enjoy a general boost of status were the European tourists, who because of their good faith formed an easy target. It was our trick to approach them and warn them not to trust anyone and to watch their luggage carefully. This way we automatically earned some extra trust, and at the first opportunity: bye bye luggage. But those were all pranks; the big hits were arranged by the police force itself. Their method existed of placing hashish in the luggage of the tourists, if it was a couple that is, and then arrest the male and lock him up until the woman freed him by being cooperative with the inspector, in the usual fashion.
From nation to nation
After leaving my family, friends, and possessions behind I crossed the first border filled with hope, to the neighboring country, to once there meet people who were hardly different from where I came from, that is, when it comes to religion and mentality. And so it continued, to my disappointment, one country after another, until I started to wonder if this was everything there was.
… "You must go to Amsterdam," they said, especially in Istanbul, and one day I found myself standing there.
It was the only city that didn't want to see me gone, even though I was frightful and kept myself hidden from the police, until I found out that they were too busy looking good and showing the way to the national museum to be bothered by illegal aliens.
My travel through time, a trip of five centuries, ended except for the Netherlands also in confusion. Keep in mind it is easy not to get confused when you're too stupid to see the difference. I had no idea there was a people like the Dutch. They were peaceful and quiet, polite and friendly, and in conflicts they admitted their mistakes. … At other moments they criticize themselves "I'm an idiot", without seeing that as a lack of self-respect, pride, or manliness.
They spoke quietly and actually listened, making me imagine myself in wonderland. But besides those wonders the transition also brought pain. Like a fish on the beach who no longer belongs in the water but wasn't yet ready to walk the land … The Dutch way of living was something completely beyond me. Especially the calm behavior of the people had an irritating impact. Violence of voices and gestures was the only form of communication they knew and now they expected of me that I would restrain, and conform to the Dutch manners.
Introduction to the naive fools
If there were no Scandinavians, of who I don't know a whole lot, then without a single trace of doubt in my voice I would call the Dutch the nicest, most honorable, civilized, honest, objective, and outspoken people of the world, while my opinion about their social system, police, jurisdiction, education, etcetera, is equally high. I'm sometimes still surprised about the way of life in the Netherlands and the behavior of the Dutch, even though they form a rich source of entertainment and happiness in my daily life. But when someone doesn't agree with me or doesn't understand what I'm talking about it's either a moron or exactly one of those Dutchmen, while in other countries in their most ideal dreams people wish they could reach the same thing as here, or at least almost the same, because also the Dutch are not perfect.
How can a people be so advanced in their thought while being so naive at the same time? Or the other way around: how can people as smart as the drug lords of Colombia or the master minds of the mob and yet be dumb enough to ignore the lives they wreck? The answer is easy: we only develop our brains in those areas where we train them. The story of the Dutch is simply the story of a people who lived so long in a neatly arranged society, and developed its kindness so far that it not only forgot what a mess looks like, but never developed the intelligence to keep itself clean: the Dutch don't see the mess around them and hence do not see a good reason to protect themselves against it.
… the little bit of optimism I had was totally shattered when I discovered the highest authority in the field of optimism were the same self-pessimistic Dutch, with the possible exception of the Ostrich, of course.
Cyclops chasing a dream
Considering the support for great institutes like the Pieter Baan Centre where the mental health of criminals is observed, and despite the many unemployed psychologists and social workers, the latest fashion in the Netherlands is psychology. About the only thing that goes on is the constant digging into the backgrounds searching for the justifications, which comes in handy, because all the freely floating intelligence has to be used for something. And that's how the Dutch fail to see, totally absorbed by the ever-increasing number of situations, that there doesn't have to be a difficult explanation for everything. If a dog compulsively barks that could be because he's locked up too often, but about his instinct to chase cats nobody has to wonder. If a Dutch boy grows up without problems and all of a sudden starts stealing or becomes aggressive, then it would make sense to find the reason for the deviation from his normal behavior.
But when I am aggressive, that is my normal reaction. For me controlled behavior would be a deviation from the normal pattern. In short, some people do something purely driven because of circumstances, while others do so because of their nature. Some people go nuts, others are already nuts.
… a Moroccan woman who recently gave birth to a child all alone at home was surrounded by Dutch women from the neighborhood who were all sorry for her. "What a horrible experience that must have been", they said, placing themselves in her situation, without realizing how normal something like that in third world nations is. That's how guest workers, who used to live in groups and given their living conditions thought themselves as rich as kings, were forced to believe by their social workers that they were actually not happy, because the Dutch in mutual circumstances wouldn't be happy.
… It's time the Dutch realize that other people don't look at this world with the same eyes. Or, more to the point, it's time the Dutch realize that all the bloody political incidents, the civil wars, the border disputes in the Middle East, the far East, or elsewhere, that continuously make the news, could rather directly spill forth from an aggressive nature, without there being a difficult explanation for this. And that when a pro-Iranian Hezbollah movement or any other kind of extremist Muslim group forms a fanatic army, while shouting, "Allah Akbar", any kind of reasonable policy or ideology is out of the question, but that we're simply dealing with a bunch of idiots, psychopaths, and imbeciles who do whatever they please.
Beware of discrimination
No matter from what nation a fresh immigrant comes to the Netherlands, he will spend years figuring out the Dutch, unless he spends a couple of euro to buy the Dutch constitution which is available in most bookstores, and from which he can get some basic knowledge about them, including their sense of humor. He opens it, full of suspense and expectations, and wham! There it is, the first paragraph of the first chapter, what else could this be about? "Everyone who finds himself inside the Netherlands will in equal situations be treated equally. Discrimination because of religion, philosophy of life, political inclination, race, sex, or on any other grounds, is not allowed." The jewel of this statement is the words 'or on any other grounds.'
… There's no doubt that the history of discrimination is horrible and shouldn't be forgotten.
But somewhere in the campaign against it, with endless TV series about slaves in America, Jews in the second world war, South Africa, the Ku Klux Klan, etc, the Dutch lost track, short-circuited their brains, until they melted the various separate occurrences into one gigantic monster. Meanwhile they failed to see, intentionally or not, the word was used by either side like a gun against the head.
… nobody thought about there being more sides to the word "discrimination."
1. Direct discrimination: A ship got stuck at the pole. A helicopter comes to the rescue with warm meals for the whites and bread for the blacks.
2. Indirect discrimination: Whoever calls American people nice, calls at least one people not nice.
3. Subjective discrimination: An old Dutch woman is afraid of foreigners, and avoids them.
4. Objective discrimination: A Dutch moviemaker wants native Dutch actors for his Dutch movie - he doesn't want Moroccans.
5. Counter discrimination: A Turk who only rents rooms to Dutchmen.
6. Reversed discrimination: A Dutchman who isn't allowed in a bar for dark skinned people.
7. Inversed discrimination: Foreigners who are treated better and get more opportunities than the native Dutch.
I'll leave the various forms of discrimination for what they are, because the state prefers to keep the privilege to unite them into one big thick bat. One wrong word ('Moroccans live dirty') and the TV, left wing organizations, the police, the ministers, not to forget a group of recent graduates, freshly brainwashed students who want to use what they learned in practice, will be banging on your door. "What did you say? Come with us, you'll be put to justice." Once inside the courtroom, "You'll be made an example and we'll show the world how good we are here in the Netherlands," says the judge with a deep voice. "Pardon your Honor", interrupts the lawyer, "You just said 'How good we are here in the Netherlands', and according to the code of law, article 2 sub 2, regarding indirect discrimination, you hence state that the rest of the world is evil."
A month later the judge is trialed. Meanwhile other situations fall into the blind angle of the eyes of the judge: while the government is making a big issue out of the employment of foreigners and makes proposals to force Dutch employers to hire them, foreign employers only hire their own people, and nobody notices a thing.
… we concluded, due to the death of a three years old, that a pit-bull terrier is more dangerous than the average lap dog, and because of that, on the grounds of objective discrimination, there is a law that obliges the owners of pit bulls to have their dog wear a muzzle, and not just the owners of pit bulls who bit once before, or all dog owners. Because that's the way the facts are. The choice is between acknowledging and denying the facts.
… Discrimination of the wrong party is certainly wrong, but not more wrong than a wrong understanding of the meaning of the word, and not more wrong than the blatant accusation of others of wrong discrimination when that isn't the case. The word discrimination should be rebalanced and reevaluated, and it should perhaps be determined what forms of discrimination aren't entirely wrong.
… Ole, we are the Champions
The first impression of a Dutchman is that of Atlas carrying the weight of the world. At the second one that opinion doesn't change. At the third one it seems the Dutch are set on proving something with their good deeds, regardless of the consequences and perhaps regardless of the one at the receiving end of the good deeds. "What did you say there, do you use phosphate-free soap? Oh, that's nothing, I'm doing animal protection. What? Your mother works for Greenpeace? That's child play, my mother works for the Association of refugee aid and my brother is against acid rain, my father protests against the bomb, our entire family opposes discrimination and we have two pitch black kids living in the barn, who we took back from our holiday in Africa, even though we really wanted three of them, can't you see how great we are. And yes, almost forgot, we also voted for the green party."
The Indians paint their faces, Africans put rings around their neck and into their lips, some people wear jewelry to show their status, and the Dutch put their conscience on display.
The Muslims in the spot light
Thief knows thief, cop knows cop, junkie knows junkie, and Muslim knows Muslim. The Dutch however, who never learned to know themselves, prefer to get to know the Muslim, and do not do a very good job at it.
The Dutch meet Muslims on cultural gatherings, on markets, and parties. They see sparkling, shy eyes and a sincere shining smile and think: how nice, how sociable, how lively these people are. And when they look at themselves in comparison, they see what they lack, but fascinated and captivated they move like insects to the source of unusual light. In the expectation that what shines there is gold, they don't see that the nice looking people are often the biggest monsters and that men like Ceausescu or Hussein beam as strongly at their parties as anyone else. Or did the Dutch think that unfriendly people are beasts with dangerous, unshaven faces and clothing drenched in blood, groaning and growling, "murder, murder"?
… when a Muslim does something right, or something not wrong whenever that is expected, the Dutch yell, "I told you they're all right!" And when they meet my mother, the sweetest and frailest old women they've ever seen, they couldn't image that she's the one my stories are about, and how aggressive she is on the inside. The Dutch can't get to know the Muslim, no matter how hard they try, because the Muslim won't let himself be known.
It can be interesting to see in what ways the Islamic culture differs from the Dutch one, but it can be dangerous not to see that seemingly mutual morals and habits differ vastly in intention and effect. In the Netherlands the important and rich people often walk around in the cheapest clothing, in which they step into their Audi of half a ton, or depending on the weather, on their crunching old bicycles. If they wear a suit, then only because of their work or because they find it pleasant to do so. In Islamic nations however, where one wears a suit to feel superior toward others, nobody with any kind of status would ever want to be found on a bicycle.
The, "Thank you", "Sorry", "Sorry", "Thank you", which easily comes from the Dutch mouth, upon which he looks you straight in the face, would be seen as self-humiliation in Islamic nations, …
… a conversation with a Dutchman is never complete without a dozen whys. The question why is offensive in Islamic nations and can lead to trouble. Given the great many differences under the superficial resemblances, I only named a fraction of them, combined with the ease at which Muslims lie and the confusion created by Dutch researchers pumping all sorts of, for Muslims, entirely unimaginable questions into their ears, followed by the pulling of the answers from their mouths that they desire to hear, it shouldn't be hard to imagine how many misunderstandings about Muslims continue to exist. I on the other hand walk in and out of their Mosques, sit among them in their clubs as their 'comrade' and hear them tell how depraved the Dutch are and how easy it is to fool them, not to mention the dangerous things they say without knowing what I think.
Do you know the Koran?
… If we truly want to understand Muslims, we must have a look at the Koran. And while I learned the book by heart, assisted with whiplashes, I've been reading it lately to refresh my memory, and pondering if Muslims abuse the Koran, or the other way around, or both. The following citations are from the translation by J.H. Kramers and can give the Dutch a global impression of the convictions and mental baggage of their fellow citizen.
Sura 2, 191: 'Fight them not at the Inviolable Place of Worship, as long as they don't fight you there. Though if they attack you, then slay them.'
Sura 5, 38: 'And the thief, male or female, you shall cut off their hands as pay-back for their crime, and to serve as an example of punishment from Allah.' If the Muslims in the Netherlands are so devoted to their religion, they will also have to accept the punishments of that Allah.
Sura 24, 2: 'The adulteress and the adulterer, whip each of them a hundred lashes.'
Sura 24, 31: 'And tell the believing women, that they subdue their eyes and maintain their chastity. They shall not reveal any parts of their bodies, except that which is necessary. They shall not strike their feet when they walk in order to shake and reveal certain details of their bodies.'
(To subdue your eyes applies to men as well.)
Sura 24, 4: 'Those who accuse married women of adultery, then fail to produce four witnesses, you shall whip them eighty lashes...'
Sura 4, 15: 'Those of your women, not maintaining their chastity, you must have four witnesses from among you against her. If they bear witness, then keep her in the houses, until death pays her debt or Allah shows a way for her.'
Before comparing the Koran with the Bible, it should be noted that with the Bible I do not mean the old testament, which isn't less ridiculous than the Koran, but the new testament (N.T.). And while the Koran and Bible have the same purpose, spreading a religion, the difference between them is striking. While Christianity (N.T.) spreads it with friendship and love, without force, asks to pray for the unbeliever and to help them with their conversion or otherwise forgive them, etc., Islam is hard, biding, punitive and aggressive. Or, with one word: primitive, because it hasn't changed one bit in fourteen centuries.
… Such a difference inevitably results in collisions and even without that there's a clear social conflict between what the Dutch and the Muslims are allowed to. Islam forbids letting dogs inside your house, entering a house where a dog lives, or shaking the hand of someone who touched a dog. This makes social relationships and friendships between the Dutch and Muslims highly impractical, especially when the Muslims aren't allowed to eat on the same table with Dutchmen who eat delicious sandwiches with pork ass. Next there's the clothing issue, which goes deeper than one would assume from the surface. A punker paints his hair, a hippy puts flowers in it, a soldier keeps it short, and those frequenting discos cover it with gel. Everyone does as he pleases, Muslim women on the other hand abide to the 'hizjab' and cover their head, not because they want to or because of their clothing style, but because uncovering their head makes them impure, dirty, and repulsive. Their 'hizjab' is a gesture, a manifesto, that contains a judgment about the Dutch women, who they approach with a polite smile that is less innocent than it seems.
This opinion, which Islamic women carry with them from under their 'hizjab' has been poured into them from childhood, because all Muslim women find all white women - simply put - repulsive.
… This results in an interesting one sided situation, where the Dutch give all their love and only get contempt in return, then what are all these Muslims doing in the Netherlands? It can't be so that Allah agrees that such a halal (pure) Muslim civilization lives on such a haram (impure) soil. Back to the content of the Bible and Koran. Some people claim the Bible also contains reprehensible scriptures, or that the Koran has good sides as well. In the Bible that I read (N.T.) there must be pages missing with the instruction to whip and mutilate, or scriptures with a mutual intention.
… The good side of the Koran doesn't neutralize its bad side.
… we can answer the question if Muslims abuse the Koran, or if there is a mutual relationship between the two of them. Claiming that the Koran is innocent to the behavior of Muslims, or that Muslims abuse the Koran, both abusively justifies the other party. In reality the two strengthen each other.
But the word abuse is incorrect, because both Koran and Muslims manage to use each other very well, and belong to each other. It's the soft New Testament the Muslims wouldn't like, and the Koran would reject the Dutch at first sight. The reciprocal relationship between Muslims and Koran doesn't mean the Muslims would be helpless or harmless without the Koran. … Take a gun away from an enraged man, and instead he'll grab a stick or stone.
No matter how nice and spontaneous the Muslims may be, they're not the only ones. Also Dutch children, that is till around the age of twelve, display spontaneity, not that spontaneity isn't the same as being childlike; both come forth from the lack of self-criticism and thoughtfulness. Understand children as children, and much of their apparent incomprehensible behavior - such as seeking attention, crying about futilities, and the tendency to dislike everything, becomes clear. Such behavior became obvious and widely displayed when it came to a book that was so important; the behavior of a child whose toy was taken away.
… Children are also quick to anger and fight for straps [scraps?]. No wonder that the Islamic nations are continuously at war, and that their leaders cannot hold peace negotiations as adults. Movies, drama, and ego trips have a childlike relationship to each other. Children like to imitate TV programs, and they find themselves incredibly important and interesting. The Muslims ventured out onto the Dutch streets exactly like they were used to in their own countries, inspired by all the movies they had ever seen and fascinated by their own moustache and manly behavior. And drama is certainly not something patented by children.
Regardless if the subject is about children or war, the environment, sex, or heart attacks, if I want to go into more detail, I often find myself referring to the evolution of human civilization. The Muslims are no exception to this, but so are people in general. In the stages a child goes through until it reaches adulthood, form an equal evolution like process as the development of ape to man. But not every child develops at the same pace and doesn't continue for the same length of time, so why would the different peoples on this planet? There are even examples of people, like the Biami's who only recently made contact to the outside world, who now still live like in the stone age - and not because they don't know how to modernize, but because they don't know better.
Maybe it's simply a matter of an evolutionary gap, though in this context I'd like to add that the evolution I refer to only spans a cultural development, the developing of social behavior and mentality; it seems as unlikely and illogical to me that two peoples would go through the exact same development as two fingers having the exact same print, or that two frames of two leaves would be alike. Moreover, a higher level of development doesn't have to be a blessing, as proven by our, as good as ruined, planet. It seems we never should have crawled out of our caverns. But less development means matter of fact more touchiness, more impulsivity, more aggression, basically: more of the characteristics we started out with as apes.
Thresholds and limitations
Although the ape-man, the lower civilized and the higher civilized all are emotional creatures, the distinction is mainly a matter of thresholds and barriers; thresholds above which they decided to respond and the limitations they apply to their actions. However, both these factors as well as the conscious and the control exercised upon it are directly related to the degree of development of the people. It's this realization, or the lack thereof, leading to almost anything being a reason for a fist fight in third world nations, and because of which the Dutch are almost impossible to offend.
… It happens that a Dutch girl wants to kiss but doesn't want you to touch her body, goes with you but doesn't want to pull off her clothes. It can even go as far that she wants to lie naked together yet doesn't want to have intercourse. Or, in a more common situation, a Dutch girl would want to pose as a model in her underwear but would never prostitute herself. A girl in Morocco kisses to have sex, or not at all, and if she's stupid enough to pose in her underwear, she might as well become a prostitute because her family would never believe otherwise and cut all ties. Girls from Amsterdam have long learned not to smile to Muslim guys, because they take that as a wink, and next cling to them until they say 'lesbian' and walk away. The stairway of evolution upon which a people stands depends on where their boundaries lie. The more two peoples differ when it comes to that location the sooner conflicts will arise. The difference between the Dutch and the Muslim is as extreme as it gets.
… A collision occurs at the moment that a Dutchman who expects words in return for his words, or swearing in return for his swearing, suddenly is beaten up without realizing that, for the other person, this is completely normal, and without realizing the other person has no brakes.
… The question remains at what point they decide to take actions, and how far they decide to go with their actions. Shall they just think of a curse, or also utter it silently? Shall they call it out loud or draw a knife?
… Another way to look at thresholds and limitations could be an answer to the argument that not all Muslims constantly shoot people in bars and that not every Turk goes as far as pumping lead into his sister because she doesn't marry the man who her parents promised her to. If we consider sensibility and insanity as a measuring cup with a scale of one to ten, and we assume that position nine is the point where someone has lose hands and position ten is the point where someone becomes insane enough to kill, than it's logical that someone who's normal behavior is closer to ten, lets say eight, reaches ten a lot easier than someone who's normal behavior lies at two. If both of them move two degrees, one would be at the ceiling (crazy enough to murder), while the other would rise from two to four. Warm water is a lot easier to get to the boiling point than cold water. This same insanity scale can be applied to the average behavior of a nation. The average of the Dutch people is probably 2, that of Scandinavians 1, and the Iranian average is a fat 9 and that in most Muslim nations probably 8. This doesn't mean that there are no easy going decent Muslims. Of course there are, maybe they're even more decent than the Dutch, but a people existing of a handful of sensible people among fanatics is for that reason not the same as a people that only has a handful of fanatics.
…We should be thankful to Rushdie for provoking the Muslims enough to show their true colors. Without this incident the iceberg would have kept growing unnoticed and resulted in a much bigger collision later on. Now the collision leads to a discussion about how shocked the West was about the protests, and by Khomeini's dangerous threats, though people should really talk about how dangerously shocked the West was by Khomeini's threats. Who touches a defective coffee machine can get one of two shocks: 1) the electric shock, 2) the shock of the unexpected. Who knowingly touches a bared wire can only get 1) the electric shock. The biggest threat lies in the shock that the West got from Khomeini's threats. Whoever lets himself be surprised in a game of chess loses.
The West should have seen this coming. Because from a shock you can recover, but ignorance and the surprise factor means a permanent danger. Regarding the collision between Islam and the freedom of speech, Muslims have as much a right to protect their religion or even be aggressive, as the white man has to protect his freedom of speech or his imperturbability. But either set of rights can be in effect for either party in their own nation. That's why a Dutchman can't demand that the Satanic Verses is sold in Turkey or Morocco, like a Muslim can't expect to uphold the sharia in the Netherlands. Muslims would deserve our praise if they returned to their own country to scream their lungs out of their body. Talking about screaming, a small amount of the 5,000 Muslims, gathered in The Hague, screaming "Die Rushdie", equals proportionally about 150,000 protesting Dutchmen. We're talking about one protest, and only the people who actually showed up to protest, so not the ones who weren't allowed out of their house or weren't allowed to protest. The protestors didn't protest out of principle, or even out of anger, but from pure aggression.
Aggression for the sake of aggression alone. … Being offended is sometimes purely a form of aggression. … Like being offended can be a form of aggression, fundamentalism can be a form of stupidity and narrow-mindedness.
This explains why the people in the middle ages were such fundamentalists, … So let's not cover up the pure fanaticism and stupidity of the Muslims with nice words like fundamentalism as long as they continue to chase Rushdie. Some people undoubtedly truly believe that Rushdie provoked the Muslims, or that it's in the common interest not to provoke them any further. But firstly it's not a provocation when someone in his own nation enjoys his own freedoms and ways of life; and secondly we should, if provoking is wrong, forbid the banks from having money or forbid people from having stereo installations build into their car, because that provokes thieves.
… my mother asked me how he could have written such a book, even though she, just like all the others, never saw or read the book. … To get back to the surprise factor: Whether it's about the philanthropic concert organized by George Harrison for the victims of the flooding in Bangladesh, where the money was snatched away by the rich, or for striking down a democratic movement in China, again and again people will be the victim of the surprise factor.
They don't see the events unfolding and they don't learn from their mistakes.
An excellent relationship
In the preceding text I might have given the impression that I believe the Muslims should never have come to the Netherlands. Quite the contrary: I compliment them with what they've achieved so far. And why wouldn't they be here and take the maximum advantage out of the goodwill of the Dutch, if that's exactly what's expected of them, and are even encouraged to do?
The big blunder, as now is commonly acknowledged, was only committed fairly recently, when anyone could enter the country because the Dutch didn't feel for doing the dirty work. Now they're facing even dirtier work, which they leave for others as well [by that I assume he means future generations]. This blunder was even bigger because preceding it there was no thorough investigation to their habits, their religion, or their mentality. And it didn't go like this either: "Dear parliament, what do you think: it will only increase the circulation of our papers, our television will have something to babble about, our lazy police gets some real work at last, and our writers and publishers will feel what they never felt: fear, and we'll get a guaranteed supply of problems for the first coming two hundred years. So come on, guys, raise your hand if you're for it."
And that's where one hundred fifty hands went into the air. More dangerous than mistakes of judgment are mistakes of mentality, because they keep being repeated. Someone who accidentally commits a crime is much more easily put back on a straight course than someone with a criminal personality.
Visit the argument-waterfalls
Now that the Muslims are here, obviously, there's a torrent of reasons for their presence. Though I must admit that I am quite sure of the fact that there are a lot more Muslims in the Netherlands than arguments. Like everyone knows the first argument to explain the arosen problems is that Muslims in the Netherlands are discriminated against and aren't being accepted into the society. Myself, also a dark skinned Muslim, have during all the years that I've been in the Netherlands, never experienced discrimination, except from foreigners. The worst that happens to me is that a woman puts her wallet away or that a guard in the store keeps an eye on me, which I can respect, because their distrust, in the last instance, can be blamed on the stealing habits of my own kind.
Regarding being accepted: I have met a thousand Dutchmen and have dozens of Dutch friends, and never was I given the feeling that I wasn't welcome or was ignored. To the contrary: I'm often annoyed that I'm treated extra politely. The truth is that only those who create a situation where they are being rejected, who patronize themselves and become inaccessible, feel discriminated against. For really it is the Muslims who reject the Dutch, and their complaints about being discriminated against is only a diversion that comes in handy. "But the discrimination and mutual social problems are only a matter of adjustment", argue the sociologists. They explain to us that the Muslims, children as well as grown ups, have difficulties transferring from their culture to the Dutch culture, and that they, as long as they are busy with that (many years by now), demand nothing except being tolerated.
That probably holds more, and an older, truth than the sociologists researched. Maybe the Muslims had adjustment issues in their own nation, where they fought continuously, were aggressive, even before their arrival in the Netherlands. … If the adjustment argument held any ground, the Dutch who immigrated to Canada and Australia would become aggressive, hard to educate, commit crimes, etcetera. "But our problems, are after all, the price we pay for living together, and isn't living together a matter of giving and taking?" ask the Dutch. But that isn't the case in this situation. If there really were a society of Syrians and one of Dutchmen, both in Tokyo, it would be logical if both would go to the same length to accommodate to each other.
But the Muslims happen to be in the Netherlands, the motherland of the Dutch, their home, and necessary accommodations would have to come entirely from the side of the Muslims, without any obligations for the Dutch. I can't move into someone's house and redecorate it, paint the television pink before breaking it, smoke cigars, throw out the cat, and expect him to accept it. Besides, if the Dutch would only adjust to a foreign nationality for 10% they would be torn apart. "Yes, but the Netherlands had colonies, and that isn't fair either", some will mention. Firstly, we can't say "Listen, you killed my family, so now I'll kill yours", in other words, one wrong doesn't justify another wrong. Secondly, it must be acknowledged that the Americans in the Philippines, the English in India, the Dutch in Indonesia, all of them, despite the often despicable treatment of the local population, helped to build up these nations, constructed railroads, founded schools and industries and even help maintain their culture by protecting historical monuments and buildings from the locals that used them as toilets.
And when the time was there, and their presence was no longer appreciated, they left, though perhaps a little later and in a less friendly manner than it should have been. Once they were gone, all that was history. But the presence of the Muslims in the West is another story. "You're sowing unnecessary panic. A mutual situation as the one of the Muslims in the Netherlands existed in the 17th century, and back then the immigrants managed to adjust themselves as well. That immigration wave the Dutch survived," I hear some think. That's all true, except for the word mutual. Unlike three hundred years ago, the immigrants today are Muslims, and that's where the main difference lies, …To me it seems short sighted to expect that something that worked out all right in the past will also work out well in the future.
Because if that was the case stuntmen would be invulnerable. … "Alright, alright, but there are only a handful of fundamentalist Muslims on about 14 million Dutchmen", some optimists bring up against this. I strongly doubt if it's just a handful. A handful of non-fundamentalists seems more likely. But regardless of that matter, a handful is often more than enough. It only takes one loud voice to stir a group of calm people, one thief and all shops take precautions, one anti-social family and an entire street loses it's charm, one east European metal turtle and hundreds of car drivers become endangered, one escaped murderer and an entire city lives in fear, and finally: one potential hijacker and a million passengers will be body searched for years. And even then: if I'm planning to harm a hundred people and none of those hundred has plans like that with me, who is in danger?
"Okay, maybe you're right, but you can't say it's the fault of the Muslims that they are the way they are", believe many. That's correct, but are the Dutch to blame?... no matter how often you hit us, we'll time after time turn you the other cheek," is what the Dutchman thinks. This attitude isn't wrong, and it's true that revenge doesn't pay off, and even when you turn someone the other cheek, the other will only feel guilty, hence punishing himself. The Dutch are making the mistake that this principle, since it worked on them, also works on others. They forget that some people never feel guilty nor see the error in their ways, because they lack the mental capabilities for that. You can't place your cat next to a mean dog, let it almost be torn apart and come back later with your cat in the hope that the dog learned from its mistakes.
Conditions for change
It's perhaps a brutal or ridiculous thought that in the current situation the best solution is that the Muslims change. But changes, regardless if they're genetic, astronomical, or ecological, only occur under certain conditions. This includes the Muslims, who in order to change must qualify for certain conditions considering intellect, character, will, capability, circumstances and time.
Intellect: in order to adjust to the Dutch way of living the Muslims must be able to understand what the Dutch are talking about. In all honesty, the Muslims don't have the slightest idea what a Dutchman really is, how open minded he is, how insane or free, maybe they don't even understand that the Netherlands isn't an Islamic nation. Themselves, and their Islam, they don't understand one bit either.
Character: in order to change someone must have a flexible personality. Fundamentalism is the direct opposite of this flexibility. And even then: in order to put water in a jerry can of gasoline you have to take out the gasoline first.
Will: the Muslims are not only proud of the aggression they develop toward Rushdie; they are convinced of their own character. The Islamic schools symbolize a signature under a statement that they don't want to change.
Capability: even if someone tries hard to change, this doesn't mean that he will actually succeed. You can't teach a cat to fetch sticks.
Circumstances: if there, it's been said before, were only a few Islamic families spread out over the Netherlands and in a classroom of Dutch children had only been one Islamic child, then the change would have been inevitable. Had there been three, they would have stuck together and change wouldn't have happened naturally. But on schools where the majority of the children are Islamic, change is close to impossible.
Time: even if all conditions would be met, change is still a long evolutionary process.
"And what about you, sir Rasoen, or whatever your name is, you yourself are the counter argument against what you say, because you yourself show that Muslims can change." That thought must have risen for some. I think it was plain dumb luck that I had the required ingredients inside me, next to the determination, required to let the changing process of several generations take place in one human life, and I believe sincerely that the average Muslim can't bridge that gap.
The Muslims themselves will of course disagree. As far as they're concerned they're Dutch the moment they have a Dutch passport. Other foreigners think you first have to get drunk, watch Andre van Duin and learn how to say 'chot-verdoma' (god damn me) and 'eutkereng' (welfare) to deserve that title. I disagree with both of them, because that's not what it's about. It's the mentality and norm system.
… The question is not what they look like, but if they treat people with the same original Dutch friendliness. Will they behave like machos in the neighborhood watch? Will they be corruptible as policemen? Will they verbally abuse the patience [patients?] they nurse? Will they honk nervously in a jam? Will they behave autocratically toward their employees? Will they be as tolerant as the Dutch or whine continuously, protest, and start a lawsuit? All in all, will they behave in a Dutch manner or keep their own mentality? All these questions are kicking in open doors. … And this brings us back to evolution: which goes steadily and not with jumps, including the Muslims in the Netherlands and the underdeveloped nations, as long as they don't reach the level of the West.
If we for example examine a nation like Pakistan and view the evolution of human behavior as a grayscale, this means that miss Bhutto is certainly a step forward and a lighter grey, but how much lighter? She likely thinks less religiously than her predecessor, less dark, but how much less? … Once again the answer to the question if Pakistan has been westernized is: no.
Integration: a saddening fairy tale
The hippies with whom I sat on the streets of Kabul, while that was still allowed, had their good and bad sides, just like those in every other movement. But the most daring stunt of their ideology of free love, without a steady partner, no matter how sensible in theory and well meant, didn't work in practice. It hurts when your girlfriend lies right in front of your nose in bed with someone else. Human nature isn't a matter of right or wrong, but one of fantasy and reality. The Dutch are pretty much the successors of the hypes with their learned by heart Technicolor-fairy tales about the supposed integration. They challenge the fundamental laws of nature, where millions of different kinds of plants and animals lived together in harmony for millions of years with each other, and where only the Dutch are needed, with the thought to mix them to realize the unavoidable consequences.
… How can it be that, … an integrated society cannot be accomplished? Well, it's no miracle. After all, when we cry because someone died, it's mostly a brother, sister, or parent.
And when a Dutchman in Malaysia is hung for drugs possession this doesn't make it into the newspaper in Tanzania. Why not? Because the people there do not feel connected to a stranger like they do with their own people. Every nation, including the Dutch one, if you like it or not, has somewhere the feeling that they form one big family (kind seeks kind), since that's how man works.
… in a village in Gelderland, which I'll keep anonymous for its own good, where people don't seek their own kind because they already have each other and managed to isolate themselves from the neighboring villages. During my stay of a week in this village, where I wasn't unwelcome, I was in an atmosphere so cozy that I had rarely experienced it since I knew the meaning of that word. And while this village held roughly twenty thousand people, I had never experienced so many people calling each other by their name, who took a walk at night in their own traditional clothing, laughing and with so much pleasure among each other that it seemed they formed one big family. And indeed: I found out they only married among each other.
But the best proof of the atmosphere of trust that was present there was that the goods of the stores that closed during the afternoon remained outside unguarded, and that while some shops stood out of sight in twisty alleys. When my week was over and I left again, I knew that I had been among people who knew where they stood and where they were. It's the identity loss (which this village didn't suffer from) added to the conflicts that arise between different types of people, which sows diversion [division?] in a nation. A nation like the one where Rushdie was born, is split in two because of the differences between Muslims and Hindus, and then in three parts thanks to the Pakistani's and Bengali's, and likely Kashmir and other chunks will follow on that list, where the Romanian Transylvania, Lithuania, the Canadian Quebec, and the Soviet-republic Georgia, and many other areas are, and will be added to.
Which proves that the most obvious and effective solution for differences of opinion between two people is: splitting up, a natural phenomenon that is seconded by the houses in which people everywhere on the world live in separation, by the supporters of Juventus and Liverpool, and by the thousands of divorces each year. If China had been split in two, a progressive and conservative part, then they wouldn't have to lose as many human lives. Because living apart doesn't make people into enemies, but brings them closer together as friends. … So far the Dutch integration theory and the expectation of her success remained afoot by lack of proof and evidence to the contrary. But with the arrival of a second generation of Muslims who, regarding clothing, habits, and social environment, are still loyal copies of the originals, and with the arrival of forty Islamic schools, there is now the irrefutable proof that the goal to integrate two cultures is a huge failure.
The way the Dutch treat their refugees shouldn't seem odd to anyone who is familiar with their general behavior, and this includes the amount of clamor that accompanies it. … As far as the Dutch are concerned a refugee is a refugee and therefore I, as a refugee, can commit a murder in the Netherlands today, flee to Bangladesh, let myself be declared dead, buy a new passport under a new name, escape as a refugee across the same route to the Netherlands, to once there be treated as a king all over again.
And in course of time, if nobody appears to be keeping an eye on me, I can go on a holiday to my own country, and spend some Dutch currency, which of course I got by registering under several names hence receiving welfare more than once. (The Dutch embassy in Sri Lanke has confirmed accusations of the VVD that many Sri Lankian refugees secretly go back on vacation to Sri Lanka. Source: Teletext news of July 8, 1989) … those escaping hostile behavior might very well not be innocent or harmless, might very well have left behind women and children or even be capable of the same hostile and even criminal behavior: of all of the above cases are known.
… Maybe the Netherlands isn't too small for even more refugees, but there will never be enough space to let good will and nationalism coexist. Here I must remark that the Dutch doesn't seem to understand the difference between good and right. Driving your car all the way from Amsterdam to Tilburg because a shop sells shampoo in glass instead of plastic bottles is well meant, but not right.
… This moment Amsterdam alone houses 8,000 illegal refugees [written in 1990]. Who are they? Maybe they're the same people the real refugees escaped from - who gives a damn? After all, having seen so many movies about the resistance hiding people from the nazis, something like that should be tried at least once, and it's exciting too. And 8,000 is nothing. It would really be a start if we freed all the progressives from all the tyrannical nations and let them come to the Netherlands, to later on, when times changes and progressive leaders arise in those nations, save all the conservatives. But the climax of this existing game would be the foundation of the International Refugee Recycling Center (IRRC), which hopefully will serve Dutch refugees as well.
Nero, Idi Amin, Gaddafi, Ceausescu or Saddam Hussein - are the names of bad people, evil people, people who committed terrible crimes in their nations. We satisfy ourselves with the thought that they, and they alone, are responsible. Maybe we are in need of someone to place the blame upon, because the blue sky won't do, and our own shoulders seem out of the question. What we do not realize is that in a nation only things can happen that the people to a certain degree set into motion, by minority or majority, dictatorship or democracy. Certainly a leader doesn't always represent the majority, but someone like Ceausescu at least needed the support of a decently sized minority. Someone can only become a leader, or remain one, as long as the people are at his hand and cheer him on, or elect him as their leader, as can be seen in old movie fragments of the most tyrannical leaders.
Someone who finds himself in a vacuum with his ideas can never maintain his position as a leader, let alone acquire it. Ayatollah Khomeini could gain power because the Iranians are fanatics. Nobody can claim that he fell out of grace with his people, for they arrived with millions to mourn for him, and this at the beat of slapping their own head. The same went for Alexander the Great, and still goes for Gaddafi. If a team of Dutch scientists were to travel back in time on a peace mission and pick up a thousand warriors who would have perished because of Genghis Khan, and took them back to the present and give them houses with central heating, refrigerators, and social security, then this would not only frustrate these warriors in their instinctive urge to fight, but also force them into a suffocating life, much nastier than the fierce death on the battle field. The logic People = Leader goes also for the social system and laws of a nation.
In a nation only that happens what moves a nation. If the people of a nation are cruel, so will be the laws and their leader. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. And when the lions were sitting in the middle of the Coliseum, one chewing on a hand, and the other on a hip of a prisoner, then the public wasn't upset and grossed out en masse, "Bah, why does Caesar force us to watch such a horrifying thing?" but enjoyed it to the fullest. In the same manner brutal police violence comes forth from the people. After all: till the day someone joins the police force he is the people. It is no wonder that the Dutch police officers are such cuties. The punishment for crimes in Thailand or Malaysia isn.t the same as in the Netherlands, because the mentality of the population isn't the same. Hirsch Ballin may try all he wants to enforce by law that the hands of drug addicts are cut off and homosexuals castrated, but he will not succeed.
Why not? Because neither the system, nor the police, nor the population would accept it. The same law would pass in Turkey or Morocco. It's well known that in many nations the death penalty goes for less serious offenses, such as drug possession, political opposition, and sometimes reporting the news - simply because that's the 'barbaric' (in the words of lady Thatcher) mentality of the masses. On that ground we can conclude (moldy expressed) from the messed up juridical system in the United States, that the Americans themselves are messed up, and in the same way the continuous wars between Muslim nations shows the aggressiveness of the Muslims, and not the one of its leaders. And it also explains why on July 15, 1977 thousands of Saudis joined forming a circle dressed in white clothing, to see the head of their princess be chopped off with an Islamic sword - though not with one strike - because she slept with a boy she met in Beirut. By the way, the same could have happened in Jordan, Oman, Yemen, and dozens of other nations, although the government of Iran prefers more fashionable methods, like stoning to death women who are found guilty of adultery (Quom, august 1, 1989). Things like that are a great deal of fun for the people.
You shall reap what you sow
Everything is but the sum of its parts. You can't replace half the parts of a Mercedes with Skoda parts and call it a Mercedes. When you let so many strangers into a nation, you change the population of that nation, and eventually the nation itself. As it stands that isn't that bad an idea, because life would be boring if nothing ever changed and we still danced the foxtrot. But going backward just for the sake of change seems impossible to defend, and the changes go in a backward direction because the people who enter the nation are backward. Besides, people arriving on Schiphol, the Dutch national airport, aren't asked: "Good afternoon, do you have any forbidden objects such as firearms, drugs, a wrong mentality or other contraband? And will you please stand under that machine? We'd like to measure your adrenaline response to 200 questions with which at the same time your way of thinking is measured."
The problem is that there's no effort taken what so ever to separate desired from undesired, rebellious from unrebellious, and dangerous from harmless strangers: everyone can enter.
… Even if we accept that people are responsible for all the abuse in the world, we still haven't defined the matter at hand clearly enough: the real wrong doer is the mentality of the people.
So now, in large amounts, people come to the Netherlands carrying with them the same mentality that caused so much havoc in their own countries. The mentality spreads through the Dutch society, and eventually the Dutch will make a stand against it. And because life exits of everything we experience between life and death, if what we experience is no longer Dutch, our life will no longer be Dutch either. … The content of the nation has changed, so the nation itself will change along.
Destruction of culture
With the change, or maybe we should say the decay, of the nation, its political, juridical system, and of course its culture will change as well. And now we're all smart enough to know that culture means art, music, fashion, dance, kitchen specialties, architecture, etc, which are pretty concrete and hence easy to protect. But there's another form of culture, … That's the kind of culture that cannot be touched, or photographed, or registered, and can't even be pointed out in a clear manner. The 'anthropological' culture, … is the sum of the sincerity, safety, happiness, and coziness of a nation, with other words, the atmosphere and how people feel and that's what I assume is what we should concentrate on. And on top of that: isn't it the anthropological culture that determines the esteem of the materialistic culture? The Dutch culture after all is Dutch because the Dutch live in the Netherlands and feel Dutch. Hence it's worthless fiction that you could maintain the Dutch culture as the Dutch people changes.
… There are people who do not believe in culture. Their disbelief deserves respect. After all the times have changed, and people stopped believing in heroes, loving the father land, military power, respect, the monarchy or culture. And while their opinion is reasonable, do they realize that the culture, which they do not believe in, isn't the culture they should be concerned about? Because if they for example do not believe in brutal police violence, then they must believe in friendly police officers. And if a friendly police force is the direct result of a good culture, then they should either believe in that culture or keep their mouth shut about brutal police violence. The belief in one mixed society where several cultures are protected is the great contradiction of our time.
It's like someone who says she loves seals, which is why she wears many of them around her neck. The world and all the cultures within it are like a painting palette, with on it several beautiful colors of paint, each with their own unique hue. Mix them all up, and you don't only have any color left, it'll be impossible to point out one individual color in the sludge. That's how the EU culture will look in the future.
I'll let the cultural threat from foreigners in general be for what it is now and focus on the more specific threat of the Muslims, which is also a political threat, and limits the amount of colors to two. We can mark the Dutch and Muslims with respectively yellow and red, as to be expected symbolizing "soft" and "hard". A teaspoon of yellow in a pot with red won't harm the red. The other way around the pot with yellow will never be the same: it's a lot easier to make a honest man dishonest, to make a calm person nervous, than the other way around, or to get addicted in bad company than it is to get clean in good company, and finally it's much easier for a hard person to dominate a soft person than the other way around. It's only natural that the Muslim culture will dominate the Dutch culture than the other way around, not because that's the intention or even desirable, but because that's just the way things go.
But beware, for the Dutch believe in culture and are willing to make sacrifices for it. Sacrificing one finger for another finger, nobody will be surprised by that. Sacrificing an entire hand for one finger starts to sound awkward. But the Dutch do not know limitations and basically say "We want to die for a finger", where they forget that if they die, the finger dies as well. Applying this in practice this concept will lead to the point where the Dutch will sacrifice their honesty, coziness, easy going nature, and even the so called tolerance which started the entire thing. They will, simply put, sacrifice their culture to protect the Islamic culture. Which seems even more illogical because that culture is already well protected in the nations the Muslims came from. Protecting them in the Netherlands would be comparable to feeding every single one of the extinction-threatened ice bears of the north pole to the endangered tigers of India.
The contemporary future
I came, since I started to understand the Dutch, to the conclusion that only the Netherlands, if it had protected itself, would have reached such a high level of development that it would have closed the prisons and left punishment to the conscience; walking naked through the streets would be normal, shops would be equipped with self service counters, the police as good as disbanded, pollution brought back to a minimum, production labor merely handwork, and the population shrunk to one million people, all of them living in a bungalow. Could that have been possible? It seems too late to wonder. In a certain way it is wrong and even dangerous to make predictions about a nation, because nobody knows what would have happened in reality, and sometimes there's a turn for the better. On the other hand, had I written a book in 1642 warning the people not to cut down their forests or pollute the air, I'd spend the rest of my life borrowing Galileo's quills, and had I warned twenty years ago that Muslims in the Netherlands would revolt against a writer, then at best I would have made the first part of the Tommy Cooper show. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to calculate that 2² leads to 4 and 4² leads to 16 and, 16² leads to 256, so it becomes obvious where things will go with the Dutch.
Neither is it a wonder that the Dutch reason that they must accept an existing 2, but not a threatening 4, to once the 4 is there accept that 4, but not a 16, etcetera. But due to the appearance of articles like that of the Turk Ibrahim Gormez: (Source: De Telegraaf March 31, 1990) 'We ruined it here for ourselves', the title speaking for itself, it seems safe to assume that the 2 will never lead to 256. Safe - maybe. Right - maybe not. Just the appearance of such an article over a full color page proves that words like that from the mouth of a Turk are rare. Besides, I wouldn't know if another six other Turks in the Netherlands would agree with him. On top of that it's in my opinion the sad reality, just like the world population explosion which in a not too distant future will result in a world population of 20 billion people, the presence of Muslims in the Netherlands, unless drastic measures are taken, will show to be an undismantleable time bomb. As a matter of fact, why are we talking about a prediction: the future is already here. The Netherlands is no longer the safe nation of the past, where a girl could walk alone through the park at night, where front doors were opened or could be opened by pulling a piece of rope through the letter-box, where people could walk through their own neighborhood without knowing what fear or danger was. The 2 flew past the 16 already. Incidents unthinkable thirty years ago now take place regularly.
Impossible yesterday - normal today
… In a city like Amsterdam there are already organized gangs of Moroccan children who walk the streets at night, fight, start small riots, and disturb the already scarce quiet, while some city districts, where the Dutch can no longer do what they want, can't dress the way they like, can't say what they please, and more and more have been placed under a kind of house arrest, without a trace of the old coziness, can already be considered as lost territory.
Furthermore in all the big cities there are dozens of Surinamers and Arabians selling "Psst, hash, coke, trips", sometimes by force, if they aren't too busy with the physical harassment of the elderly and girls, who walk faster with long faces and scared eyes, unaware of the visibility of their own emotions. Other Dutchmen, who live in the pigsty that Muslims turn apartment buildings into, move one by one. Who doesn't and dares going outside carries a knife for self-defense. The Dutch, and I mean those who aren't six feet under ground already, have all in all turned into a frightened people, afraid to make jokes about Muslims, to offend them, fool them, and criticize or correct them. Added to that is that the presence of the Muslims can be felt every single day. When you pass them they look at you daringly, if you're calling in a phone booth they bounce on the door. If you say "get lost," you get a steam course in sign language; if you respond in equal fashion lesson two follows, with a shiny blade; call them, and they'll never say their name first; if you do business with them they'll try to screw you over and have a thousand demands; are you driving through Rotterdam at night, you'll only see Muslims wandering about; going to the carnival in Amsterdam or to the Dam on new years eve, then you'll only find a few Dutchmen among them; argue with them, and instantly all their friends and family members will be your enemies for the years to come; respond to their advertisement, and soon you'll be working in a 2 by 1.5 feet box in the Mandenmaker alley near the Damrak; take a shower in a public bathing house, and the owner will ask you not to shit in the drain.
And if the mess in the cities wasn't enough, the constitution has to submit as well. The Muslims take their daughters out of school years before the legal age to protect their teenage virginity, beat up their thankful women, who pass on the message to their children, use their women as imprisoned servants, if slaves isn't a better word, and couldn't care less about laws regarding child abuse and equal rights for women. Meanwhile the criminality, as is known, increased enormously, so that the Netherlands concerning theft, violence, and break-ins finally took over the much desired first place of Europe: in 1989 26.8% of the Dutch population became a victim. However, if we analyze the CBS numbers we come to the conclusion that relative to the entire population between 6 and 13 times more crimes are committed by non-Dutch than by the Dutch. But they turn, despite all their honesty, their eyes the other way. They'd rather end up suffocating from their nervous whistling, than admit who is responsible for the drastic increase of criminality and how irritated and short fused it made them. Another crime is the endless discussion about unemployment in the Netherlands, where a 100,000 schooled metal, catering, confection, and cleaning workers sit at home on the couch scratching their grey heads, while according to the labor inspection an equal sized amount of illegal immigrants have a job in the same field (source: teletext news of June 28, 1990)
Rats in the corner
Each year there are more Dutchmen - according to the statistics already 100,000  - who are full of frustration about their life, and maybe another couple of million who aren't happy with the way things go. A hundred thousand Dutchmen who live as normal, peaceful people, in their own peaceful country and went their own peaceful way until they were flooded by a tsunami of Muslims, and suddenly they no longer were normal people, but racists. Those Dutchmen have basically been driven into a corner by the Muslims where they now are accused of being against the Muslims, while in the name of a questionable philosophy a couple of hundred thousand Muslims are made happy at the cost of the happiness of a couple of million Dutchmen. That was some real clever thinking guys.
The subject of racism is still chained with unbreakable shackles to a name I'd rather not have named. "What a pity", the Dutch sigh, "Janmaat [that was 1990 – today it’s probably Wilders] is back in the lower house." They go out of their way to avoid reality that it's a conviction that returned instead of just a man. The question isn't if Janmaat is an Einstein or a chicken without a head, alive or dead, but what someone must have been through before he sees no option left but to vote on that man - multiplied with the feeling of guilt, forced upon him by the rest of the nation, with which they have to live. And the more Dutchmen who vote on ultra-right parties, the stronger the proof that the nation suffers. Or maybe people call an information number and ask "Good morning, this is Harry, I'm a bastard, who should I put my vote on this time?" It remains somewhat awkward that the left wing parties created the circumstances that allowed the right wing parties to form.
Besides, it's unfair and cruel that the majority of the 'good' Dutchmen sit leaned back, together in their neat little towns, unaware of what is going on in the big cities, where the population functions as the head of the try-your-strength machine. I hope for those green Dutchmen that they never discover what they have on their conscience. By the way, I sometimes wondered, in the assumption that I must be wrong, if some of the 'greener' people in charge, somewhere deep in a dark corner of their mind, hold a grudge against the Dutch, a personal frustration, jealousy, so it gives a kick to pour all that misery over a nation [and don’t we say exactly that today, 2007, 17 years later]. But don't you agree that it's sort of ironic? I come from a country with the intention to use you, I abuse you, I shock you, take your job, and you see me driving by through the blurred bus window in an expensive car you paid for.
You try to control yourself, but when you've totally had it and open your mouth, who is the one in trouble? You yourselves. I'm sorry, Dutchies, but you've been screwed. Don't worry, just continue with your polonaise, your carnival, and zap to a commercial channel. But the next time you tire of your welfare check, climb down the ladder of your damp garret and take an unsafe train to The Hague to protest against the steady deterioration of social securities you enjoy with a fellow 1.5 million countrymen, or the next time you read in the paper about a stabbing, or become the victim yourself, realize that you asked for it.
This is what Santa Claus will bring for the Sleeping Beauty:
* Homosexuals will be afraid to reveal their sexuality.
* Nudity and other violations of Islam will no longer be allowed on TV or in public.
* Criminality will increase further.
* The Dutch will inherit criminal behavior.
* Crimes will be punished more severely.
* There will come new national laws the Muslims desire.
* The value of an eyewitness report will decrease in court.
* The amount of depressed people and suicides will increase.
* Corruption will take on epidemic proportions.
* The use of alcohol in public will be forbidden.
* The Dutch will become irritated and short fused.
* The innocent look in the eyes of the Dutch will vanish.
* The Dutch workers will be pushed out of their jobs.
* Several groups of Muslims will get into conflicts.
* The honesty and mutual trust among the Dutch will vanish.
* The coziness, sense of humor, and urge to freedom of the Dutch will disappear.
Some of the above predictions might not be obvious right away. So let's go into detail about a couple of them as an example of how changes take place.
Crimes will be punished more severely: the mild punishing climate in the Netherlands is sufficient for the soft Dutch people. The two balance each other out perfectly. However, the mild punishments combined with the luxurious prisons would seem like some sort of social welfare in third world nations and attract millions of inmates each month. As criminality continues to rise in the Netherlands, it will be necessary to take harsher measures, and against the Dutch as well. An indirect blow from the left, and it will hit the Dutch honesty, trust, peacefulness, social security, job atmosphere, and a big list of other facets just as hard.
The Dutch workers will be pushed out of their jobs: The labor conditions in the Netherlands are unique. The Dutch worker is used to working in a relaxed manner, in a friendly environment, where the relationship with colleagues, eye contact, and the atmosphere is much more important than money. Next it's amazing how natural and unofficial, and how unfanatic and how un-Japanese the Dutch act at their jobs. The Muslim worker is (pretty much just like the American, English, and about every other worker) obsessed with money. He will, through a much more energetic, enthusiastic character, try much harder to earn more money, think up mean tricks, barter, lie, cheat, and whatever else it takes to get higher up. What the consequences of this will be doesn't require much argumentation.
It only takes the slightest glitch in the spontaneity of a joke, a gesture, or a cry out, and someone could get annoyed and plop, there goes the soap bubble. And you can give all sort of rights regarding freedom to the people and try to convince them through the TV, hammering on the fact that we live in a free nation - it's pointless if the people are afraid to stand up for their rights, … You smile at the wife of a Turk and wham, you just got a punch. "Hey, we're in the Netherlands, man", you remind him. Wham, another punch. "Hey, stop that, it's against article 42." Bang, now it's an uppercut. "Hey now, this really should stop." Boing, a kick for a change. "We've got freedom of speech here, you do know that right?" Baff, a karate-punch to finish the job. You bend over, gather your teeth from the street, …
The bizarre part of the whole thing is the question why it was necessary, no matter the price, to take the risk of having the Netherlands get hit by a massive immigration wave of Muslims. Of course there are situations in life where risks need to be taken, but only when there's no other option.
… the Dutch are forced into the relationship of the same kind as that of a match and a gas cloud: The little match in the kitchen, where it belongs, is blamed for a possible explosion, even if it was the gas that shouldn't have been there. After all, if we look at all the Iranians, Pakistanis, Liberians, Saudis, Iraqis, Turks, Moroccans, etc, who live in the Netherlands, and how much freedom they have, and if we look at how many Dutchmen live in their country, and how many restrictions to their freedom they have, and finally what circumstances, communication methods, information channels, terrorists, spies, and secret agents are needed to let that situation function properly, we should be able to imagine who is facing the wrong end of this numerical inequality.
The course of the downfall
It starts with challenging nature's laws as two fundamentally different worlds are brought together in a miniscule point to carry out an experiment. At one side the soft Dutchmen, drowning in a sea of conscience and guilt, and on the other side the hard Muslims, medieval robbers. A people that in their own Trojan bodies not only carry their culture, but also the corruption, bloodshed, desperation, misery, and disaster, currently seemingly harmless like the mustard gas bombs that lie on the ocean floor. The situations may remind some of the one on Pearl Harbor, you know, the day the Japanese said: "Surprise!"
The behavior of the Muslims currently hasn't fully deployed yet, and can be compared to the one of the boy who is new at a club. It takes a while before the ice is broken and he starts to move more at ease, until at last his true nature becomes visible. In the same way most Muslims in the Netherlands are self-conscious and afraid to openly challenge the Dutch. But as time progresses and they continue to claim victories like having their own schools, universities, mosques, hospitals, beaches, swimming pools, sport centers and whatever else they can think of, they'll steadily become less shy and more self assured. The Muslims will stamp the Koran into the head of their children through the ears, a brainwashing behind closed doors and curtains, so they will start to hate the Dutch and see them as their enemies. For this purpose they've been granted their own schools, where they can fabricate Muslim-bombs without any disturbance.
And then there's that other industry, which supplies Islam in an unstoppable pace of much more disciples than the Dutch mothers can keep up with. Because of this difference (as well as importing brides and grooms from the home country in 75% of the marriages) the Muslim population will surpass the Dutch one eventually. … In a certain stage there will be more incidents like the affair with Rushdie, and the Muslims will reconsider their right to be offended by the libertarian, sinful way of life of the Dutch, a way of life that they consider to go straight against their Islamic way of life. They will state that a Muslim woman can't walk through a street with sex shops, dog turds, girls with short skirts, or that the sight of that is a violation of their Ramadan. The government, who'll at that moment be more concerned with the oil price and the course of the dollar, besides finding it more important that the Dutchmen with a ton on their bank account can hang in front of the TV, than that they can walk the street as free citizens, will go for a compromise to avoid complications, and come up with an emergency law that forbids the display of pornography in shopping windows and the walking of dogs, but not quite yet the wearing of short skirts during the Ramadan.
A handful of Dutchmen, cursed with a greater respect for their own existence and a stronger will to survive, will object to the changes that are taking place and protest, to be directly oppressed by the majority, turned into outcasts, and branded as racists. The Muslims will count on the guaranteed reaction of the Dutch, by making optimal use of it, and strike the Dutch like leprosy and take away their hand finger by finger. After the passing of the century, somewhere around 2010, the bombs will be done ticking and ready for the big bang. But on the other side underground movements and gangs will have been created because of the repressive and frustrating situation. During this stage most Dutchmen will realize what a grievous mistake it was to be friendly to the wrong persons.
But since the international image and the public decency still have the highest priority, the Dutch will continue to ignore their problems, or wipe them under the carpet, lacking the guts to face them. Instead they'll keep the dialogue going, in the hope to still convert the Muslims, and one will blame the other for not trying hard enough, or for not accepting the Muslims enough. And too busy unpacking their mental baggage in search of the last possible justification, they won't see the smile on the faces of the Muslims who watch the overly diligent oddballs. While all this is taking place in the Netherlands, the Muslim leaders elsewhere, who kept themselves informed of the developments, concentrate on plans for the long term.
And whether a country like Iran at that moment only partially helps with the revolt will hardly be of importance to the Muslims. Strengthened by their higher positions in politics and the national bureaucracy, which they didn't have before, and supported by their allies in Belgium, Germany, England, and France, the Muslims shall create a network of mutual loyalty, and undermine the entire social system. Once that's over and done with, the Muslims will realize that they no longer have to maintain nor tolerate the oppression and suffocation of their hollow love affair with the Dutch. In the year 2020 the first stage of the downfall will be completed. The Dutch anthropological culture will be lost. From then onward, year after year, the Dutch will have to, like a body without a soul, live on in grief and regret the loss of what was built up over the centuries, and of a clock that wouldn't turn back if it could. Many years and many tears later the situation will only have worsened. Till the day the great incident happens. An incident where two rivaling foundations of two rivaling cultures make a frontal collision. Then the Muslims will hit back with all they have for the first time. Men, women, and children will go out on the street as one man, and not like recently against Rushdie, but a hundred times amplified and with a hundred times that rage.
And though the Dutch will fight for their norms and values, the Muslims will not only surprise them once again with their barbaric methods, they will punch straight through their soft and decent defense. When a pack of wolves attacks a herd of sheep the outcome is known beforehand. By now it should be obvious what the Koran means with: "When you meet the unbelievers in jihad, chop off their heads. And when you have brought them low, bind your prisoners rigorously." (Sura 47, 4) And not until that moment will the Dutch at last admit that they, by letting the Muslims into the Netherlands, planted the disasters of strange countries inside their own territory. So now, as never before, they will all vote on a party who aims for a 'definitive solution' of the problem. But since they no longer form the large majority, since the Muslims will vote on their own Muslim party of which the well-camouflaged prototype already exists, this will not accomplish anything.
Afterwards the Muslims will steadily continue to overmaster and dominate the Dutch, who will have no choice but to participate in a game of tug of war where they will steadily lose ground. The Dutch on their own side won't know of a solution nor be capable of carrying out a possible solution. And revenge isn't their style. The Muslims, who will know all this, shall start to make the nation obey their will and more or less gain control. And with the help of supply lines from their own countries or through private immigration centers they will allow for a continuous flow of immigrants who will establish themselves in the Netherlands, and indirectly force the Dutch out. By 2050 there will be no Netherlands left, or at least, nothing worth calling it that. The second stage of the downfall is then completed.
The final remedy
It is 2050 by now. The European Union gave up on the unification and closed her borders again. Scandinavia cancelled her relationships with the Netherlands, while the United States is angry at the Dutch government for housing the Islamic rampart, which in turn threatens American citizens in Europe. Many Dutchmen have found refuge in the surrounding nations and of the Dutchmen left behind the women dress as Muslim women to avoid trouble. The jihad has started. The queen and most of the ministers are still in the Netherlands, but the party of the Muslims has a strong position in the cabinet. Iran and Libya have direct influence through their European headquarter in Rotterdam and their secret army, the 'Islamic Execution Squad'.
Dutch and Islamic gangs fight it out in the streets and the population has taken the right in their own hand, since the police are afraid to take action. The nation is frozen by fear. The queen calls for the remaining truly Dutch ministers to come together for a secret meeting. Nobody is allowed in our out of the royal palace. It's expected the congress will last a week. They will eat and sleep in the palace, guarded by the armed forces. After five days the congress is over and the following is concluded: The provinces Groningen, Friesland, Drenthe, Overijssel, Gelderland, and Limburg will be declared as 'New-Netherland'. Utrecht, Noord-Holland, Zuid-Holland, Brabant, and Zeeland will from now on be 'Old-Netherland'. All Muslims are to be deported from New-Netherland to Old-Netherland.
Borderposts making the former Berlin wall look like wire-netting are built like roads between both countries. New passports are handed over to all the real Dutch people, who only get one chance to choose between the two countries. Regardless of how bizarre and unreal it may seem, or maybe even is, still it happens. Countries split regularly. And while it's hard to imagine at first, the cause is always the difference between two cultures. But the longer it takes to realize this reality, the bigger the chance of a civil war. Though mostly it doesn't get that far. Sometimes a people, like the North American Indians, and the Australian aborigines, are walshed flat, such a people goes extinct, with a few remaining behind to become attractions for tourists with Canons and Fujis.
Unhappily ever after
About a year ago a girl from Limburg decided to go on a vacation to Amsterdam. She heard nice stories about this big city, but wasn't aware of the dangers. So she walked nearby the Zeedijk into the wrong street and was raped. The same day she returned home, with her trust in pieces and her eyes wide open for the rest of her life. Some wounds heal and some things cannot be undone, but all the guilt and tears shed at the Anne Frank House cannot bring six billion [million] corpses back to life. With which we are back at a people that isn't that much bigger than those six million.
There they stand, the Dutch with their completely justified and without doubt noble striving to dissociate themselves as far away as possible from Hitler's ideology. Completely blind to the fact that their path circles back to the other end at the jews (with all due respect). The poor devils continue to misunderstand that a choice isn't necessarily between the Nazis or the Jews, predator or prey, oppressor or victim, but that there is an alternative, a third road, which is save yourself and guarantee the continuance of your own culture and your own country. It's simply this one, tiny misunderstanding, that will make the Dutch go down in history as the people who thought so deeply about a nightmare from the past that they ended up becoming that nightmare.
— Mohammed Rasoel
To all those who read it all, this is written in the Netherlands about the Netherlands. Here in 2007 it reads to me very much like what’s happening in my own country. Does it also read like yours?
We were given an honest warning by someone who knows what he’s talking about. Our leaders ensured, by banning that warning, that we would never see it. We must ask questions about the loyalties of our leaders. We must also ask: what are we going to do not only about Islam and Muslims, but also … our leaders.
Thanks to Profitsbeard for the heads-up.
Keep your powder dry.