Muslims and Westerners: The Psychological Differences
Thursday, 09 December 2010 17:51 Nicolai Sennels
February 27th 2008.
On a cold and windy Wednesday (for cyclists like myself), I took a deep breath, grabbed the microphone and did something that changed my life. In front of the Copenhagen Mayor’s Integration and Social Services Office there were gathered several journalists, a faithful Muslim musician from the famous MTV-band ‘Outlandish,’ dozens of Imams and Muslim spokesmen and a couple of hundred social workers with Muslim and Danish backgrounds. I began to say what everybody already knew, but, what nobody either wanted or dared to say: that those who are referred to as foreign criminals, religious extremists, or terrorists in the making and who are the cause of lawless parallel societies (what the conference "Diversity and Safety in the City" was about) are all Muslim. I argued that we should stop talking about "criminal foreigners" and start using the more precise term, "criminal Muslims." As a psychologist, having had more than a hundred Muslim clients, I told them that politicians and professional social workers need to understand the cultural and religious backgrounds of criminal foreigners. That is, if we want to come up with, at least, somewhat effective and targeted plans on how to reduce the social unrest, anti-democratic religious movements, the violent and anti-social forces among foreigners.
I was met with strong criticism from all sides and no support at all!
Just as most soldiers in the front lines die in the first attack, many of those who attacked political correctness have experienced negative professional or social consequences. I was no exception. The Mayor of Social Services was clear. I should either refrain from using stigmatizing expressions or find myself another job. Actually I was trying to stop the so-called stigmatization of all the non-Muslim immigrants by focusing on the one group that creates all the problems. But you can't fight City Hall. Our biggest national newspapers and radio news programs got hold of the story and the mayor was strongly criticized by the media experts on free speech and by the Danish blog-sphere. For about a month there was not a day when my name was not in one or more newspapers and the fighters for free speech took another round. I was no longer an anonymous psychologist. My name was known by everybody who read newspapers in Denmark and especially Islam-critical blogs on the internet put me in the spotlight.
Instead of keeping my mouth shut, I decided to write a book about my experiences with Muslims based on hundreds of therapy sessions. The whole circus that had happened concerning my case had already shown the necessity of breaking the taboos around criminal Muslims. Further, a serious discussion about the relationship between the Muslim culture and criminal, antisocial behavior is, indeed, very much needed. I managed to negotiate a deal that gave me four months severance pay. I am probably the first psychologist in Copenhagen who was offered $20,000 dollars for quitting his job voluntarily. I guess they just wanted to get rid of me, ASAP. I found a well-paying job as a Military psychologist doing psychological screening of soldiers returning from the war in Afghanistan. I also started writing my book, in which I describe a psychological profile of the Muslim culture. The title of the book is Among Criminal Muslims: A Psychologist's Experiences from the Copenhagen Municipality. (Free Press Society, 2009).Still to be translated to English
After having consulted with 150 young Muslim clients in therapy and 100 Danish clients (who, on average, shared the same age and social background as their Muslim inmates), my findings were that the Muslims’ cultural and religious experiences played a central role in their psychological development and criminal behavior. "Criminal foreigners" is not just a generalizing and imprecise term. It is unfair to non-Muslim foreigners and generally misleading.
Discussing psychological characteristics of the Muslim culture is important. Denmark has foreigners from all over the world and according to official statistics from Danmarks Statistik all non-Muslim groups of immigrants are less criminal than the ethnic Danes. Even after adjusting, according to educational and economic levels, all Muslim groups are more criminal than any other ethnic group. Seven out of 10, in the youth prison where I worked, were Muslim.
The book was reviewed in several magazines and newspapers and it kickstarted the Danish debate on the relationship between cultural background and criminal behavior. The Danish magazine for professional psychologists reviewed it:
….Among Criminal Muslims is a provocative eye opener, convincing and well founded with many concrete examples.
The professional magazine for teachers of teenagers wrote:
Sennels’ reflections and critical discussion concerning our efforts towards young criminals deserves to be widely known.
Our biggest national news paper Jyllands-Posten, that printed the Mohammad cartoons, wrote:
The book is an original piece of pioneer work by focusing on the responsibility of the individual and involving the impact of religion in the shaping of the young person’s identity.
This is a summary of some of the things that I discovered.
Anger
Muslim culture has a very different view of anger and in many ways opposite to what we experience here in the West.
Expressions of anger and threats are probably the quickest way to lose one's face in Western culture. In discussions, those who lose their temper have automatically lost, and I guess most people have observed the feeling of shame and loss of social status following expressions of aggression at one's work place or at home. In the Muslim culture, aggressive behavior, especially threats, are generally seen to be accepted, and even expected as a way of handling conflicts and social discrepancies. If a Muslim does not respond in a threatening way to insults or social irritation, he, not "she" (Muslim women are, mostly, expected to be humble and to not show power) is seen as weak, as someone who cannot be depended upon and loses face.
In the eyes of most Westerners it looks immature and childish when people try to use threatening behavior, to mark their dislikes. A Danish saying goes "…Only small dogs bark. Big dogs do not have to." That saying is deeply rooted in our cultural psychology as a guideline for civilized social behavior. To us, aggressive behavior is a clear sign of weakness. It is a sign of not being in control of oneself and lacking ability to handle a situation. We see peoples’ ability to remain calm as self confidence, allowing them to create a constructive dialogue. Their knowledge of facts, use of common sense and ability in producing valid arguments is seen as a sign of strength.
The terror-threatening and violent reaction of Muslims to the Danish Mohammed cartoons showing their prophet as a man willing to use violence to spread his message, is seen from our Western eyes as ironic.
The Islamic expression of "holy anger" is therefore completely contradictory to any Western understanding. Those two words in the same sentence sound contradictory to us. The terror-threatening and violent reaction of Muslims to the Danish Mohammed cartoons showing their prophet as a man willing to use violence to spread his message, is seen from our Western eyes as ironic. Muslims’ aggressive reaction to a picture showing their prophet as aggressive, completely confirms the truth of the statement made by Kurt Westergaard in his satiric drawing.
There are follow up comments and what I have gleaned as similiar comments from other blogs
This cultural difference is exceedingly important when dealing with Muslim regimes and organizations. Our way of handling political disagreement goes through diplomatic dialogue, and calls on Muslim leaders to use compassion, compromise and common sense. This peaceful approach is seen by Muslims as an expression of weakness and lack of courage. Thus avoiding the risks of a real fight is seen by them as weakness; when experienced in Muslim culture, it is an invitation to exploitation.
Locus of control
There is another strong difference between the people of Western and Muslim cultures; their locus of control.
Locus of control is a psychological term describing whether people experience their life influenced mainly, by internal or external factors. It is clear from a psychological point of view that Westerners feel that their lives are mainly influenced by inner forces – ourselves. This is reflected in our points of view, our ways of handling our emotions, our ways of thinking, our ways of relating to people around us, our motivation, our surplus, and our way of communicating. These internal factors are what guide our lives and determine if we feel good and self confident or not. Every Western library has several meters of self help books. Every kiosk has dozens of magazines for both women and men that tell us how to create happier and more successful lives for ourselves. Our phone books have columns of addresses for psychologists, coaches and therapists. All these things are aimed at helping us to help ourselves create the life that we want. Some might argue that all this introspectiveness is too much and that just doing what is useful for oneself and others here-and-now would be more constructive, but this is how our culture is.
All these things do not exist in Muslim culture and countries. The very little psychiatry and psychology that is taught, in only a few universities in the Muslim world, is imported from the West. It is mostly taught by teachers educated at Western universities and does not have roots in the Muslim culture.Muslims have something else. They have strict external rules, traditions and laws for human behavior. (click om image to see more Imam's instructions)
But Muslims have something else. They have strict external rules, traditions and laws for human behavior. They have a God that decides their life's course. "Inshallah" follows every statement about future plans; if God wants it to happen. They have powerful Muslim clerics who set the directions for their community every Friday. These clerics dictate political views, child rearing behavior, and how or whether to integrate in Western societies.
The locus of control is central to our understanding of problems and their solutions. If we are raised in a culture where we learn that "…I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul," as William Ernest Henley wrote in his famous poem Invictus in 1875; we will, in case of personal problems, look at ourselves and ask: "…What did I do wrong?" and "…What can I do to change the situation?" People who have been taught throughout their entire lives that outer rules and traditions are more important than individual freedom and self reflection, will ask: "Who did this to me?" and "Who has to do something for me?"
Thus, the locus of control is central to the individual's understanding of freedom and responsibility. Even though our Christian based societies may, in certain situations, give too much emphasis on feelings of guilt; it also strengthens the individual's sense of being able to take responsibility for, and change one's own life. In societies shaped under Islamic and Qu’ranic influence there may be fewer feelings of guilt and thus, more freedom to demand the surroundings to adapt to one's own wishes and desires. This may include demands to wear Islamic costumes which can result in more Muslim demands for Islamization of our Western societies, but it is also a powerful source of victim mentality and leads to endless demands on one's surroundings. In a very concrete way this cultural tendency, shows itself in therapy, as a lack of remorse.
Maroubra December 2005 - Handiwork of "provoked" Muslim youth (over 100 cars smashed).
The standard answer from violent Muslims was always: "…It is his own fault that I beat him up. He provoked me." Such excuses show that people experience their own reactions as caused by external factors and not by their own emotions, motivation and free will. Even though one's own feelings, when experiencing an insult, can be moderated by one's own point of view, this kind of self reflection does not happen to the same degree among Muslims as it does among Westerners. It only takes one person to beat up another: the guy who is doing the hitting. It also only takes one person to feel insulted. Being beaten and feeling insulted are thus strictly different social events. The latter depends on ones self, while the former is solely caused by outer circumstances. Unfortunately, this fact is not considered in Muslim culture and apparently also not by the supporters of laws on hate speech, racism and defamation.
The difference in mentality is clearly stated by the old Indian proverb:
You can walk around softly everywhere by putting on a pair of shoes, or you can demand that the whole Earth becomes covered by soft leather.
It is a question of locus of control.
Self reflection vs. consequence
I have seen with Muslims, this cultural difference, concerning locus of control. It has been the source of countless failed social and integration projects. Besides the great support from our welfare systems, our state departments offer a variety of entertainment and guidance to criminal Muslim youngsters hoping that the thankfulness and trust that normally appears from such generosity will create a good relationship, respect and willingness to cooperate. But when the program of social events and appointments with patient social workers ends and the demands of mature behavior appear, the "mutual respect" often evaporates.
Westerners feel that it is "our standards" that determine real consequences for people. We like to think, that if they get some guidance and a second chance most people will learn from that guidance and make use of their chance to improve. We are afraid to set strict boundaries because we do not like people to feel punished, even though our motivation is to stop people from destroying their own lives and the lives of others.
What we have to realize is that we need to be flexible to think outside of our own cultural boxes. I would like to quote from our Danish philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard from his book Either/Or: A Fragment of Life:
“If one truly wants to help a person, we should first of all start by finding where he is. This is the secret to the art of helping. Anyone who cannot do this is arrogant.”
European, Australian and North American politicians have spent trillions of Euros and Dollars in trying to avoid the apparently unavoidable; the failed integration of Muslims. Money has been spent on voluntary offers that our badly integrated foreigners can use if they want. They do sometimes try, but it very seldom works. What we have to understand is that we are dealing with people who grew up in cultures with an "outer - locus of control." Self reflection and self responsibility have much less importance to them.
During my years as a social worker, and later as a psychologist for antisocial individuals, I have realized that the only, reasonable way forward is to follow this three step procedure:
...1.Provide guidance and help. If this does not work, then,
...2.Establish Boundaries and limitations. If this does not work, then set
...3.Consequences.
What I say here might seem to be more political than psychological. However, it is my extensive experience in giving therapy to Muslims that has led me to make this statement: We should not permit the destruction of our cities by lawless parallel societies, with groups of roaming criminal Muslims overloading of our welfare system and the growing justified fear that non-Muslims have of violence. The consequences should be so strict that it would be preferable for any anti-social Muslim to go back to a Muslim country, where they can understand, and can be understood by their own culture.
We should not permit the destruction of our cities by lawless parallel societies - Muslim gangs in Melbourne
Our mistake is that we start with too long a permissive leash and as the antisocial youngsters make mistakes we slowly restrict their freedom. During this process these young people, very often, manage to destroy their own lives with bad habits, bad friends and bad criminal records. My own experience, and that of many colleagues, is that the only functional way, is to start with a shorter leash. Then, as difficult people show that they can handle increasing amounts of freedom you can extend their options.
This way of starting with a short leash is actually very normal in our Western way of raising children. We start with strict expectations concerning school, doing homework, and behaving properly. Then, as children get older and more mature they will receive more freedom from their parents. When they are 21 years old they are expected to have learned enough to be able to handle life and are free to choose whatever education, partner, religion, life style that they want.
In Muslim culture it is different - especially for the boys. They have lots of freedom in their early lives and as they get older more and more cultural/religious restrictions and expectations appear to support the family structure. By the time they are 20 years old, their parents often have already chosen their future wives or husbands. Other choices are also less free: the expectation, for instance, to either achieve high status in education or to work in the little family run shop, to support the family's reputation by attending Friday prayers in the local Mosque. The "education pyramid" is standing upside down in the West; less freedom in the beginning, more self responsibility as one gets older. In Muslim culture the pyramid stands with its wide end down; few expectations to follow civilized behavior as a boy, and less freedom as one grows more competent, to support one's own family and religion.
Muslim identity
From my experiences with the 150 Muslims I have had in therapy, only a handful felt themselves to be Danish. Most saw themselves as Somalis, Turks, Moroccans, Pakistanis, and Iraqis who now live in Denmark. Almost none of them saw themselves as an integrated part of the Danish society. They felt alienated and in opposition to Danes and the Danish society. They did not feel at home here.
Muslim Identity - Muslim Taj El Din Al Hilaly : ‘I have said and continue to affirm that taking up residence in Western migrant society is not permissible for a Muslim unless he has the intention of calling to Allah-Exalted and Elevated.’
This was a real shock to me. Many of my Muslim clients were second or even third generation immigrants, but, still they did not feel Danish. Actually it seemed that many of them were even more religious and hateful towards non-Muslims than their first generation immigrant parents. It was clear to me that they saw themselves as quite different and even better than non-Muslims. Young Danes, who showed an interest in Islam, immediately received positive attention from even the non-practicing Muslims. So did the more hardcore Muslims. The power circles always appear around the more devout Muslims, fanatic, and powerful. The most popular among the Muslims were the true Islamists. The general picture of such an individual is a male with well trimmed beard, elegant glasses, arrogant attitude, fine manners and clothing, the Qu’ran lying on their bed along with C.D.’s of Qu’ran readings. Typically, they learn a handful of conspiracy theories "proving" that the West, especially the US and the few million Jews left on this Earth, are the cause of all the problems in the Muslim world.
I did not keep statistics of any kind, but my experiences clearly reflect several research projects on Muslim identity in Europe. A French survey in Le Figaro showed that only 14 percent of the country's estimated five million Muslims see themselves as "more French than Muslim." Research made by the German Ministry of Interior shows that only 12 percent of Muslims living in Germany see themselves as more German than Muslim. A Danish survey published by the pro-Muslim pro-democratic organization Democratic Muslims led by the Danish PM and Muslim Naser Khader showed that only 14 percent of Muslims living in Denmark could identify themselves as "Democratic and Danish." Naser Khader by the way also reviewed my book:
The professional expertise that Nicolai Sennels has, whatever party he may belong to, is exceptional and with Nicolai Sennels' clear practical examples throughout the book, the reader comes infinitely closer to understanding some of the integration problems. The book should be required reading for all school teachers, social workers and municipalities.
Since Khader himself is a Muslim and even published a book about Muslim culture (Honor and Shame) this is a real compliment to my psychological conclusions.
Being a Muslim clearly overrules whatever national identity one has. Samuel P. Huntington - author of The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order - described a "U" analogy. My findings are very close to those of Huntington. The tops of the two "towers" of the "U" are where Muslims feel "belonging to the Umma" (the world wide Muslim community), and "belonging to the tribe" (sticking together with other Muslims in the same geographical area). At the bottom of the “U” is national identity. For Westerners it is the opposite, our "U" stands upside down. Our feeling of obligation to the country where we live is stronger than our religion or group.
If integration just consists of learning the language and finding a job, it is not so difficult. But if integration also includes developing mental habits of equally respecting non-Muslims it is simply impossible for most Muslims. They see themselves as special, will always try to live together, create their own Muslim/Islamic parallel societies, feel separated and have less respect towards non-Muslims. True integration doesn’t have to, necessarily, imply religious conversion. However, for Muslims it certainly presupposes cultural conversion. Clearly, very few Muslims have the will, social freedom and strength of personality to go through such a psychologically demanding process.
So, this is THE question. Will integration of Muslims happen, satisfactorily, to the extent necessary? If you think yes, then on what basis do you make the assumption? If no, then what will you expect the consequences to be?
Honor
Honor is a central concept in the Muslim culture. Many Danish newspapers experienced mass rage from Muslims, when they published and re-published the Danish Mohammed cartoons. They have realized that Muslims are very easily offended.
What kind of honor needs to be protected by threats of terror and boycotts? Is this really honor? Maybe if seen through the glasses of a culture based on a book written 1400 years ago. However, when seen from the perspective of modern Western psychology, it surely is not. From our perspective such behavior is closer to being dishonorable.
Having to constantly keep up one’s appearances, becoming insecure and reacting aggressively when criticized is the result of low self esteem. Unfortunately the Muslim culture tells its men that criticism must be taken completely personally and met with childish reactions.
True self confidence would allow the individual the ability to think or say: “Ok. You have your own opinion about me or my religion. I have another opinion, and as I trust myself, I will not let my view of myself, or my central values, be disturbed by you.” Knowing one’s own strengths and weaknesses and accepting them is the core and basis of good self confidence.
If you had ever spent time in a Muslim community you experience this very clearly. You would find yourself constantly trying not to offend anyone and you’d treat everybody like a rotten egg. Jokes, irony and, especially, self-irony is as good as non-existent. It creates a superficial social environment where unhealthy hierarchies appear everywhere because nobody dares to, for instance, point out the weaknesses of childish men and make fun of the powerful. There is an old Danish fairytale about a little boy that points out the nakedness of the King; "He has no clothes on!!” embarrassing the proud King wearing his non-existent magic clothes, which are only visible to "good people" (actually, the King was just naked - because the tailor had cheated him!). Such a story could never have been written in a Muslim culture.
Many young Muslims become assailants. This is not just because of the Muslim cultural acceptance of aggression, but also because the Muslim honor mentality makes them into fragile, insecure men. Instead of being flexible and humorous they become stiff and develop fragile, glass-like, narcissistic personalities.
Many young Muslims become assailants. This is not just because of the Muslim cultural acceptance of aggression, but also because the Muslim honor mentality makes them into fragile, insecure men. Instead of being flexible and humorous they become stiff and develop fragile, glass-like, narcissistic personalities. Pictured - Kerem Bulut: ONE of Australia's most promising young soccer stars is among five teenagers facing court today charged with a series of violent attacks by an alleged Sydney street gang.
Unfortunately, most journalists and media people use the term “honor” when describing cases of violence where the offender makes excuses for himself by stating that his honor was offended. Since the concept of honor is completely integrated in the social rules of Muslim culture, it is seen to be justifiable when honor is threatened. This extends to beating or killing women who want to claim such basic human rights as to choose, for themselves, their own sexual partners. By using this term, as used by the offender, the media automatically takes the perspective of a clearly psychopathic and narcissistic excuse for treating other people badly. Instead, we should take our own Western culture as a basis when describing such crimes. Terms like “family execution," “childish jealousy,” “control maniac” or “insecure” would be much closer to our cultural understanding of such behavior.
Consequences of failed integration?
The World Economic Forum published a report Islam and the West: Annual Report on the State of Dialogue 2008 in which they show the results of a survey conducted in 12 non-Muslim and 12 Muslim countries. The last point in the report concerned the question: "Do you think violent conflict between the Muslim and Western worlds can be avoided?" A majority of all 24 countries think that this conflict can be avoided. However, this is not the same as believing that such peaceful development will actually occur. Overwhelmingly, 22 countries out of 24, in the survey expected that the “interaction between the Muslim and Western World is getting worse."
This survey clearly showed that while there is widespread hope for a peaceful outcome between the tensions of Islam and the West, people are seemingly very pessimistic.
Things are not going in the direction of peace.
Personally, my own conclusions match those of the survey. I believe that a violent conflict can be avoided. However, the chances of achieving that are getting slimmer and slimmer every month. We passed the point of no return years ago when such a conflict could have been avoided without taking drastic measures. Draconian measures may have to include shutting down Muslim immigration; demanding reform of Islamic organizations and leaders in the West; tightening the thumb screws on integration; becoming less dependent on oil in the Middle East; providing incentives to extremely overpopulated, impoverished countries to have less children; creating an alternative to the UN exclusively for democratic countries; cutting the EU's ability to force European countries to receive more Muslim immigrants and refugees; and perhaps even sending Muslims who proved themselves unable to adjust to our Western secular laws back to their countries of origin.
Such drastic measures are probably necessary. However, our politicians have decided to give the "long leash" first, then slowly and with much hesitation, to shorten it as things get worse and worse. With such politicians the Islamists can lean back and enjoy the show. The destruction of the "perverted," free, non-Islamic West will happen by itself.
Since the Muslim world is already here – in thousands of Muslim ghettoes in Europe, Australia and North America – the possibility that violent conflict will happen in Western cities all over the world is very great.
We need to understand the Muslim culture much better if we want to be able to stop such a catastrophe. We need to understand that it is not possible to integrate masses of Muslims into our Western societies. We need to understand that our non-confrontational Western ways of handling conflicts make us look weak and vulnerable to Muslim leaders. We need to understand that Muslim culture is much stronger and more determined than our guilt-ridden, self-excusing Western culture. We need to understand that Muslims will only feel at home in a Muslim culture and this is why their religious demands for Islamization of the West will never end.
The moment when a popular Islamic cleric declares a Muslim area as Islamic (such declarations are the tradition of Islam, and are happening all over the world - in China, Thailand, ex-Yugoslavia, Russia, Africa etc.) and orders his followers to attack all non-Islamic authorities entering the area, we will have civil wars. No State can tolerate such an attack on its authority and will have to stop it from happening and stop it from growing. These “no go” self-governing areas are already full of violent criminals, weapons and Islamic extremists. They will probably not give up either their guns or themselves to the authorities voluntarily. Such Islamic declarations have already happened on an unofficial level. All Western European countries have such “no go” areas where policemen and authorities are met with threats and flying stones upon entering; all while Islamic authorities such as Imams and homegrown Sharia courts freely rule these “no go” areas, creating Muslim ghettoes.
France today - I have no hope that we can avoid “blood, sweat and tears” during this conflict.
After having heard the stories from Muslims themselves about their culture, religion, home countries, Muslim ghettoes, their views on non-Muslims, democracy, women and freedom, I have no hope that we can avoid “blood, sweat and tears” during this conflict. It will take many idealistic women and men many years before we reach a point where we can be sure that our freedom-loving culture will win such a conflict. As it stands now, such victory is not at all certain. I hope that many brave people will stand up for what we all believe in, and be mindful of how easily it can be lost. They could write letters to their newspapers, study the Qu’ran and the crime statistics (the only two sources you need to convince yourself that Muslim immigration is a very bad idea). Then they could present their opinions in a confident manner when conversation turns to the subject of Islam and Muslim immigration at lunch, work and at family dinners. A popular movement composed of average citizens standing up against the immature and psychologically unhealthy culture of Islam is the way and the goal. Nothing is more important than that.
The result of the "Diversity, and Safety in the City" conference on February 27, 2008 was a so-called “Catalogue of Ideas.” The Catalogue had more than 118 ideas concerning what the media, the police, the state, the politicians and the Danes could to do improve integration. There were virtually no ideas about what foreigners themselves can do to improve integration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Sennels can be contacted at: nicolaisennels@gmail.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .
The above article was originally posted at: New English Review You can find here with intro from Nancy Kobrin
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/63122/sec_id/63122 and many interesting comments and muslims and apologists attempting to rebutt here that article here http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/27326
Comments (29) from australianislamistonitor continues
--------------------------------------------------------
Reluctant Infidel: Genius! This has got to be the best insight into Islamic/Muslim psychology in a century
While I'm writing this meagre piece in nresponse to the towering article of Mr Sennels, I am left wondering about many of the historical-psychological accounts of Islamist thinking over the centuries. It hasn't changed much, with good reason. Even non-psychologists such as Churchill and many others got Sennels' thesis correct all that time ago. An uplifting and liberating read. It should be circulated, translated and made available to every human being in every corner of the Earth.
1
December 09, 2010
------------------------------------------
Wendy Larkson: ...
Thank you Nicolai for a thought provoking article. It is interesting you point to the link between culture and criminality saying '...Muslims’ cultural and religious experiences played a central role in their psychological development and criminal behavior'. This should be a sobering statement for it points out that there is a structure of belief and behaviour which directly leads to the anti-social behaviour of criminal Muslims. That is to say, one cannot have recourse to the elders of the culture to restrain the anti social behaviour, for the very advice they will give will increase it. It appears that Islam embodies a structure of bullying and then masquerades as just another culture and 'religion' which is not the case. It is just as if some of the destructive cults we consider 'weird' became globalised and then by a process of bullying and political cajoling persuaded the world that 'nothing was wrong' and Islam is just another 'belief' Nothing could be further from the truth. Westerners are being sorely deceived . The west has reached the point where its relativism must cease and it must make a choice between the individualism and freedom of its Judeo-Christian - secular past - OR face the loss of these by succumbing to a very inferior way of thinking that sanctions lying to boot and a gradual falling apart of many structures. The thing is the battle must be on several fronts - one to stop further Muslim immigration - not because of racism but because it CLEARLY is not compatible with any democratic country and it is not fair on the Muslims either to suddenly present them with a way of thinking considered wrong in terms of their own 'belief' . Second we must act to restrain the increasing demands made of Muslims already in our society . Third we must continue the waves of education by people such as Nicolai- which will alert more and more people in the west as to the true problems created by Islam in the west - problems not solvable by discussion and interfaith nights.
11
December 10, 2010
----------------------------------------------
Blue Heeler: ...
What an invigorating read!
Nicolai, you are a very brave man and you have earned a significant place on the honor roll of those who stood up and were counted. Long may you run.
You wrote:
“After having heard the stories from Muslims themselves about their culture, religion, home countries, Muslim ghettoes, their views on non-Muslims, democracy, women and freedom, I have no hope that we can avoid “blood, sweat and tears” during this conflict.”
This is the conclusion I – (and so many others) – came to after our own research and exploration of muslim “cultural” and religious practices. I reluctantly began to assert that conclusion in my writing some time ago, expecting to be censured in some form or other. Instead I discovered I was only one of countless thousands who have also reached the same fearful realization.
However, good it was to find so many kindred spirits, it does not alleviate the dilemma one iota. There is an awful inevitability about the fate that is going to befall Australia.
I may not be here, time being what it is, but that is irrelevant – I love my country, I love my culture – warts and all – and to see what our own very foolish and treacherous “elite” are bequeathing future generations makes my blood boil.
I may not see the day when fighting breaks out in our streets but I am convinced our children probably will and almost certainly, our grandchildren. I expect them to face a war for survival.
I have never been one to start a fight and with the enormous power of islam, and its craven use of terror and violence, it has been wise to keep to that position but we are now so far advanced from “the early days” of writing about islam and the situation is now not “if” but “when”.
History gives 100% affirmation to that statement. NO country has ever survived a more than 10% influx of muslims. Australia’s “leaders” are hell-bent on increasing our muslim intake, so…….
My radical “take” on things, for what it is worth is that, given the historical data which convincingly demonstrates that islam will bring war to Australia and, given the raised levels of islamic belligerence we are now experiencing as “normal” in Australia, is it not time to consider some pre-emptive action?
To fail to do so is to miss one of the few remaining windows of opportunity available to us to halt islam BEFORE violence is brought upon us.
Relax, trolls; I’m not calling for violence, merely taking my cue where I find it best articulated:
Nicolai wrote:
“We should not permit the destruction of our cities by lawless parallel societies, with groups of roaming criminal Muslims overloading of our welfare system and the growing justified fear that non-Muslims have of violence. The consequences should be so strict that it would be preferable for any anti-social Muslim to go back to a Muslim country, where they can understand, and can be understood by their own culture.”
Which prompted gsw to outline in a few words a basic course of action we need to begin considering. GSW, I agree totally.
“….when the forces should fence off the area, cut off all supplies provided by the no-longer accepted host country (water, electricity, social services etc.) and not allow anyone to leave. They can have their islamic state and when 'political refugees' try to leave, they are controlled: "Why are they living in an islamic area? what do they do for a living (Imams get thrown straight back in - or shot by a military court for treason)?.
Young women attempting to get away from the pressures of a misogynistic society may be permitted to leave.”
Time is running out.
12
December 10, 2010
------------------------------------------------------------
Cassandra: ...
A truly insightful article, which confirms what most of us realise - that we are approaching Muslims in entirely the wrong way by being tolerant to their endless demands and falling over backwards to try and make them feel less alienated. It's time our experts realised that we must start making demands on them, and treat them as the spoilt and truculent children that they are. Giving them more leads to increasingly bad behaviour on their part. Time to be much firmer and roll back their sense of endless entitlement.
We are certainly playing into their hands by using their terms to describe appalling behaviour. As you say ""Instead, we should take our own Western culture as a basis when describing such crimes. Terms like “family execution," “childish jealousy,” “control maniac” or “insecure” would be much closer to our cultural understanding of such behavior."
Our culture is far superior to Islamic culture, which is totally dysfunctional.
Time to assert this superiority and insist that Muslims start toeing the line.
14
December 10, 2010
---------------------------------------
Skipping Girl: ...
In order to defeat your enemy you have to understand him.
I think the fundamental thing we have to realize is how we are seen through their eyes.
The kafir is the major doctrinal focus of Islam. The kafir has the lowest status of all animal life. The doctrine of the kafir is defined as political Islam
From Bill Warner part 6 Political Islam
Be straight with them no mixed messages.
15
December 10, 2010
-------------------------------------------
Geoff Dickson: Bravo Nicholai Sennels
Nicholai Sennels summarizes beautifully how the ideology of Islam prevents Muslims from ever integrating into western civilized societies.
First you have the doctrine of ‘al wala wal bara’ which dictates that Muslims must hate all non believers.
You have the text from the Quran which calls Jews and Christians monkeys and pigs, the vilest of creatures.
You have the text from the Quran which tells Muslims not to befriend or help a non believer.
Next you have from the Hadith, instructions to commit genocide against the Jews and to destroy the Christian church and kill Christians who won’t convert to Islam.
And finally, you have the Quranic text telling Muslims they are the best of peoples.
How in hell can any muslim integrate when they follow an ideology like Islam?
The only way forward is to STOP Muslim immigration and close down mosques where the hatred is preached.
16
December 10, 2010
----------------------------------
Truth Detector: I Love Australia Now
Blue Heeler, I too love Australia at present. Make sure the violent religion of Islam doesn't take over so that I may continue loving your country.
Cassandra, the plain truth is that Muslims will continue demanding something from you until you die a natural death, or until they murder you. That's the plain truth. We must not forget that Islam was founded for the express purpose to destroy human beings, ALL HUMAN BEINGS, INCLUDING THE MUSLIMS. Just look at Islam's destructive record. Islam is against everyone beginning with the weakest human beings, i.e., little girls and grown women. And it will be that way until Islam is destroyed. So continue fighting the good fight until Islam and its god, Satan, sometimes called Allah, are destroyed.
WE MUST DESTROY THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OF ISLAMISM BEFORE THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OF ISLAMISM DESTROYS US "INFIDELS," AND EVEN THE MUSLIMS. ISLAM COMES FROM THE ABYSS, AND SATAN IS ITS god, THE god OF DESTRUCTION.
17
December 11, 2010
--------------------------------
Cassandra: ...
Truth Detector,
I hope you are right that Islam is in its death throes.
Personally I believe that in Australia we have a huge failure of leadership, with both major parties refusing to name the problem. It is now up to responsible, sensible people to take the lead and force our leaders to take note of the will of the people - not by violence, but by determination and refusal to accept the lies that the leaders spout about Islam being peaceful etc.
19
December 11, 2010
--------------------------------
Circe: ...
Thanks so much Nicolai for your intelligence and dedication to the truth. It took courage to tell the truth -a truth everyone knows but we just refuse to face.
Re interview ---Reluctant infidel. I interviewed Nicolai some time ago resulting in 2 articles which although on site are not published yet as it was decided to put some of Nicolai's articles up so people knew who he was and what his research showed first. Our web manager will put them up when deemed appropriate. This will however mean that some bits are 'repeated' but it doesn't hurt to reinforce his findings which are such a clear and rational explanation for the fact that we have huge problems with Muslims and not with others. Islam is incompatible with our western culture and NO 'compromise' is possible.
He was happy to do the interview and I thank him for that. I have my name down for his book when translated into English and I have read all of his articles so far.
I must admit, I didn't ask him what made him dare to go against the expected views at the conference and tell it like it really is ---but I suspect he is just like that ---some people just tell the truth and don't follow the PC lies! I admire his integrity!
26
December 12, 2010
------------------------------------------
A_Nonny_Mouse: ...
From your "locus of control" comments, plus having read a thing or two about Islam, perhaps a condensed version of Muslim behavior can be posited: In Western societies, they'll do whatever they can get away with. The secret (which our feeble-minded Western "leadership" has yet to discover) is: "DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT."
27
December 13, 2010
---------------------------------------
Some further comments from another blog on the same subject
rumcrook™ said... 1 HOLY F-N HANNAH! im speachless.
and I beleive myself to be fairly well aquanted with the muslim mindset and what it portends for the west.
this is some scary stuff and it should be a must read for any foolish young college age person spouting silly memes like islam isnt much different than christianity, or its a religion of peace being twisted by a few extremists.
and people who are against immigration of muslims are xenaphobic bigots.
no, I just dont want to see my culture destroyed by a very virulent alien culture. that is not, just a different version of ours.
12/21/2010 7:12 PM
--------------------------------
Hesperado said... 2 About three years ago, I came across a remarkably odd piece of information about Muslim psychology.
At the time, I had been helping a friend who was studying for an exam for nursing school, and the main internationally accredited study guide was the Complete Review for NCLEX-RN, by Donna F. Gauwitz, 2007.
I just got it out of my closet and dusted it off, and will proceed to find the passage I found so odd.
Here it is, under the section "Unit IX" titled "Legal and Ethical Issues in Nursing, sub-titled "Cultural Diversity" (of course!), page 1051, under the heading F. Health and Illness Beliefs, #8:
"Immediate pain relief is expected and may be persistently requested."
Fascinating. It's obviously remarkable that an official nursing manual would find that characteristic sufficiently normative, and important, to be listed explicitly for concern to be noted by nursing candidates. Needless to say, that such a characteristic is normative for any culture is exceedingly strange. I'm not sure what it means, but my theory is that the reason why Muslims are so prone to torture their enemies is because they are inflicting one of their primary fears -- physical pain -- upon them. Why or how it got to be a primary phobia among a culture, and not just among certain individuals in that culture, is the interesting part.
_______________
Note:
a) the manual refers to this cultural group as "Arab-Americans" but it's clear from other parts of the section devoted to them that they are speaking of Muslims.
b) One could not accuse the NCLEX-RN of being anti-Muslim or anti-Arab. In fact, it is highly likely they are dutifully PC MC about their anxious concern to "respect diversity".
The Hesperado
12/21/2010 8:46 PM
-------------------------------
gun-totin-wacko said... 3 Interesting. I came across much of this in a more anecdotal form some years ago. It was a blog post by Stephen W Browne, discussing the differences between "Us" (Westerners) and "Them" (Muslims). It was a real eye opener. I believe that it was linked some years ago here at GoV, but I still recommend it, if you can find it.
12/21/2010 8:52 PM
--------------------------------------------
Richard said... 4 Very good, finally someone with the proper credentials saying what I have been saying.
12/21/2010 8:56 PM
--------------------------------------------
Mad Max said... 5 Great article, I agree, should be required reading for ALL.
12/21/2010 8:59 PM
--------------------------------------------
Salome said... 6 Muslim men have to pee sitting down, because Muhammad always did (except when he didn't). I'm only a woman, but I understand that men make much of being able to pee standing up, and it would seem that denying them that privilege could cause them to express their frustrated masculinity in other, and more dangerous, ways. O.K., I'm probably only half serious here, but is there anything to be made of that half?
12/22/2010 4:17 AM
------------------------------------------
kloutlichter said... 7 Men who pee sitting down are weird.I have a very good friend who does this and he says his mother told him to as it creates less mess. As a real man,peeing standing up is liberating,it also is beneficial if you need to make a quick exit for any reason.Also it allows for a fuller discharge and shows that you are no longer a child.Phychologically I cant offer any insight more than that.
12/22/2010 11:45 AM
--------------------------------------------
Sam said... 8 Let's not forget, in an emergency situation 'round the side of the house, "fumbling with the breaker box" is easier to pass off if you don't have your pants around your ankles.
12/22/2010 1:42 PM
---------------------------------------------
john in cheshire said... 9 You can analyse and try to understand them till the cows come home. But the truth is that muslims are not fit to live amongst normal, civilised people. And the sooner the West in general, and England in particular, send all muslims back to wherever they burst forth, the better it will be for us indigenous peoples.
12/22/2010 2:06 PM
--------------------------------------------
4Symbols said... 10 In hoc signo vinces
Death of the UK by one thousand Kosovos'.
The question is what psychological strategy does the West need to deploy to lift moral as it has taken a beating from the multi-cults. Ultraliberal indivdualism particularly from the right and ultraliberal equality collectivism particularly from the left has all but destroyed what I would call freewill association.
12/22/2010 3:29 PM
----------------------------------------
kloutlichter said... 11 I read this article again and it is excellent.After living in a muslim area for a time it makes alot of what I experienced clearer.I have always thought that muslim youths at 17 are more like 9 yr olds.I cannot comment on the woman.In some ways the woman are the enigma.I would like to know more what they think.The sister of a boy upstairs was very upset that when her parents were away she had to go and cook and clean for her brother,even though she had a husband and family to look after.He thought it was great.
Even though the community was very good to me ,you understood that within their own structure behaviour was monitored.While youths were tolerated when showing western ways the older a man got he was expected to conform.This article makes alot of things add up.Those who wanted to break away found it very hard to.Even to the extent that fathers back in pakistan would here of there sons behaviour and the community would gather round and apply a sort of verbal pressure.
Very interesting.
12/22/2010 5:21 PM
---------------------------------------------
another interesting observation
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=10323
Vincent: Regarding your question, the word that kept returning to my mind in Iraq was “grandiosity.” We are limited creatures, proscribed by God from obtaining too much power or knowledge, and yet we constantly entertain the fantasy of throwing off those limits to become godlike. When, as individuals, we succumb to this temptation, the result is narcissism—or, in the most extreme cases, schizophrenia. In cultures, this delusion can spawn a fetish for the all-powerful warrior—or, more often today, the terrorist. Nazis, Communist revolutionaries, Islamofascists are warriors and terrorists—all believe in their superhuman will to transcend the ego and possess the Infinite. But as religion has instructed us, Life is limitation, the acceptance of imperfection, mortality and the finite-ness of sin. It is difficult to accept human limitation. But anything else represents the cult of Death.
Today’s Islamofascist leaders have learned to imprison the lives and moral imaginations of their followers in this cult. What are the rewards for the shahid who pilots a plane into a skyscraper or a car into a line of Iraqi policemen? The knowledge that, for a split-second, he is a god, holding the power of life and death over his victims; the realization, too, that for eternity, a grateful umma will revere his memory as a true mujahedeen. And--for men, at least—there’s the never-ending pleasures of Paradise. No wonder the Islamofascists declare that they “love death more than we love life.” In truth, they are enraptured by a kind of malignant narcissism, exacerbated by the grandiosity that lurks at the heart of Islam.
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Steven Vincent, the author of the new book, "In the Red Zone: A Journey Into The Soul Of Iraq". You can visit his blog at www.redzoneblog.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment