Saturday, February 17, 2007

Don't Just Stand There, Dhimmi, Humiliate Me!

When the Imam Husham Al-Husainy appeared on Sean Hannity’s radio show he burst into a explosive rage when Hannity respectfully but insistently tried to get him to answer a couple of simple questions about his political views. Don’t take my word for this, here it is from Little Green Footballs.

I do not bring this incident up here for any political hay that might be made from the fact that the remarks the Imam is being questioned about here were made as part of a “prayer” he offered at the Democratic National Convention. That has been done to death already. I want to point it out because it is a very valuable opportunity to learn something basic about the Islamist rage in the Arab Street that we hear so much about.

Toward the end of his tirade the Imam accuses Hannity of humiliating him. I found this very interesting and provocative. In western terms we might have accused someone of attempting to humiliate us but if we are convinced we are right and prepared to reason our case and present facts, we would never jump to humiliation voluntarily. We would also, I think, take humiliation, once established, as a sign that we have been shown to be wrong or venal in some way, albeit unkindly.

Truth is, it is uncannily easy for Hannity to Humiliate him. The Imam is simply unwilling to speak directly to Hannity’s questions. Instead of telling Hannity and the world that he simply won’t answer the questions, he attempts a long, abusive counterattack that features intimidation, religious condemnation and what can only be termed “damnation to Hell”. Why, I want to ask, is the Imam so extraordinarily quick to take on the mantle of humiliation and what can he hope to accomplished by it?

Humiliation is the key to understanding the Islamist Jihad. They are always humiliated because they invite it. Actually, they insist on it. Just listen to the way the conversation goes between Hannity and the Imam. When Hannity asks him direct questions about his own words the Imam launches tirade after meaningless tirade until he is so embarrassed and exhausted that he has no choice but to hang up and get himself out of the situation.

This man, who claims to know the words and mind of God, can’t even acknowledge his own words let alone explain them. He is so unused to being questioned or having to explain the nonsense he talks, that he becomes outraged in the event. These Imams are not religious leaders as we know them in this century, rather, they evoke dark centuries past. Each of them is a small Torquemada who would condemn you to death and damnation at the drop of a hat.

Just as any other fascist (see Islamofascism post below) would, Imam Husham felt compelled to utter the standard, irrational, central mythos of his movement. It is a circular argument, they hate us because they say we humiliate them while they insist on humiliating themselves. In the true fascist style they dare us to help them humiliate themselves by holding fast to obviously idiotic beliefs and positions- one of which is that we are the ones who humiliate them.

How easy it is to humiliate the average Islamist! A beautiful woman walking down the street in a modest dress but with no burkha to cover her humiliates him. If his sister were to so much as say one word to an unrelated male; he is humiliated. If Danish cartoonists draw cartoons poking fun at The Prophet; he is not just outraged, angry or hurt, he is humiliated. It is so easy for us to humiliate them because they are using us as a scapegoat for their personal shamefacedness. This is a shame that is drawn from a different, unspeakable place in their culture. It is clear to me that they are only using the interaction between us and them to express that deep, permanent humiliation that precedes any thought of or interaction with us. That is a deep wound indeed. I am working on another post that will begin to explore the evidence for that wound.

Christians and Jews are especial targets for scapegoating because, as the Imam points out several times, we are all Abrahamic peoples. That makes us theological cousins. The Islamists remember better than we do that for centuries we were their dhimmis, (not quite slaves but not free men and women either). They held the sword over our heads and called us apes, pigs, monkeys and dogs to our faces. Now, the west is ascendant. The U.S. is the lone superpower and Israel is the most successful, freest and most powerful country in that region.

They still call us apes, pigs, monkeys and dogs but not to our faces any more. They only dare do that in Arabic when they think we aren’t listening. They are perfectly capable of lording it over us again if we let them. This rare moment in time in which we live, when might is also on the side of the right must not be frittered away. The Islamic population bomb and the Islamic nuclear bomb must be defused while we have the opportunity.


Jewish Odysseus said...

"Humiliation is the key to understanding the Islamist Jihad. They are always humiliated because they invite it."

I see a slightly different spin on this issue. The Islamic religion has served as a superb carrier and propagator of an eccentric and violent Arabian culture. Within that culture, shame/humiliation is taken with deadly seriousness, to the point that a father will murder his own daughter if she is SUSPECTED of losing her virginity before marriage...AND THE COMMUNITY APPLAUDS HIM FOR IT.

For the religious carriers of this culture, like the imam w/Hannity, the idea of humiliating a Muslim provides a moral, if not legal justification for MURDERING THE HUMILIATOR. As such, for an imam to broadcast to the world (including Muslim listeners) that an identified kaffir has humiliated him has a genuinely sinister significance.

Imagine if, say, 200 years ago, a Japanese shogun had told you: "You have challenged my honor, sir." Would you feel very safe?

Maybe about as safe as Theo Van Gogh?

It is interesting that many non-Arab Muslims (Persians, Turks, Kurds, Indonesians, Somalis) have rejected the lunatic Arabian/Wahhabi baggage, but their problem is that the founder of the faith WAS an Arabian. Oh, well, we can't afford to sit back for the next 300 years while they sort out their reformation.

Anonymous said...


Have you read "The Closed Circle" by David Pryce-Jones?

Very much the same thing you are trying to describe here. A detailed anthropological analysis of Arab mentality. Highly recommended.

Anonymous said...

Nice, forceful post.

When a Muslim claims "humiliation" there's a linguistic sleight of hand going on which we need to be clear about. For what - really - does he mean when he says he's humiliated?

* What is the Arabic term for it? What are its nuances (if any) and what is its etymology?

Anyone who can't be engaged in "spirited debate" without falling back on the "humiliation defense" (which really is an attack) is not a "moderate", not a "leader", and certainly not a "friend" nor an ally.

He is a totalitarian provocateur. He is an enemy. He is a fanatic:

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." - Winston Churchill

"A fanatic is one who redoubles his effort when he has forgotten his aim." - George Santayana
(qualifer: Husainy has not forgotten his aim.)

Jewish Odysseus said...

In addition to the superb "Closed Circle," any book or essay by Prof. Fouad Ajami is worth its weight in gold.

Jewish Odysseus said...

An excellent commentary on this topic from Fred Taub, in Arutz Sheva: