Tuesday, 12 February 2013
New Zealand Politician Applies Probability and Statistics, Proposes Limited Application of Precautionary Principle re. Muslim Males and Air Travel
As reported by Australia's ABC this evening.
'NZ Politician Wants Muslims Banned From Airlines'.
Actually, it's not all Muslims, just (presumed) Muslim males of military age, that one Mr Prosser, MP, would like to keep from travelling on planes full of defenceless Infidels. But even that perfectly sensible suggestion - perfectly sensible, given the sheer number of Muslim males of military age who have hijacked planes, blown up planes, or attempted or plotted to blow up planes, in the latter decades of the twentieth century and the first decade of the twenty-first - is giving certain people conniptions. - CM
'New Zealand politicians have rounded on a colleague who has suggested that young men who are Muslim or "look like Muslims" be banned from "Western" airlines.
He's on the right track. Where there are Muslims you do tend to get Jihad. Of course, the trick is to identify, and to exclude, those most dangerous Muslims who, in order to engage in Jihad, are pretending to be what they ain't, or who have become Muslim but are not advertising the fact; one might screen out all the ladies in Slave Rags and the gents with zebibas, Muslim beards, Arab-type robes or 'pyjamas', and trousers above the ankle, and overlook a beardless white convert to Islam dressed in normal western clothes. - CM
'In a column for "Investigate" magazine, New Zealand First MP Richard Prosser said he accepted that the majority of Muslims were not terrorists (he might rather have said, that in western countries many Muslims do not appear, at the moment, to be interested in personally engaging in active combat Jihad, Jihad of the sword; though they may be waging jihad - the struggle to establish Muslim dominance both locally and globally - by all kinds of other methods, by pen and tongue and by the purse - CM) but added it was "equally undeniable" that "most terrorists are".
True dat. - CM
"If you are a young male, aged between say about 19 and about 35, and you're a Muslim, or you look like a Muslim (does he mean, 'you are dressed like a Muslim', or 'you look like you belong to one of the ethnicities that predominate within the 'Muslim world'? Profiling by 'ethnic appearance' alone would make life difficult for Jews, for Lebanese and Egyptian and Assyrian Christians, and for South and South-East Asian non-Muslims, and for Ethiopian and Nigerian Christians; it needs to be combined with judicious use of other screening devices - CM) or you come from a Muslim country (again, one does need to ask him how one would make allowance for Copts, or for Iraqi Christians, or for Hindus and Christians from Pakistan and Bangladesh, desperately fleeing Muslim persecution - CM) then you are not welcome to travel on any of the West's airlines", he wrote.
He should perhaps consult with the Israelis on methods of profiling that do not rely merely on appearance but combine it with judicious use of other indicators. - CM
"If the greatest identifiable threat to modern aviation security is posed by young Muslim males, then surely the answer is to prohibit young Muslim males from flying on our aeroplanes".
The greatest identifiable threat - not just to our planes and trains and buses and ferries, but to synagogues and temples and churches, to the lives and property of Non-Muslims worldwide - is posed by Muslims, period. Muslims who take Islam to heart. And any Muslim, no matter how harmless he or she may be or seem to be at a particular point in their lives, may one day cease to be harmless and become dangerous, dangerously mass-murderous, once he or she decides to take Islam fully to heart.
It was not lone Muslim males but a sweet young-married Muslim couple, husband and wife, who plotted together to bring down airplanes over the Atlantic by bringing powerful liquid/ chemical explosives on board plane concealed inside bottles of baby formula. They were prepared to take their infant on board the doomed plane with them, to die with them both and go to 'paradise', slaying and being slain in the cause of 'allah'.
Girls and women have carried out murder-'martyr' raids, wearing explosive vests; if one were to prevent Muslim males of military age from boarding Infidel planes - and why not also keep them from boarding trains, buses, ferries? - then the jihad gang bosses would merely use those other Muslims - the elderly, minors, women - who were being allowed on board.
The nettle that even Mr Prosser is not yet grasping is one simple fact: that it is the Muslim 'community', the Ummah as a whole, that forms the sheltering and nurturing sea within which the jihadis, the sharia-pushers, Allah's Enforcers, swim and from which, ceaselessly, they emerge. Wherever there are Muslims, there - sooner or later - you will have Jihad. If we had never allowed any Mohammedans to settle within or to visit 'the West ' - Europe, or Australia or New Zealand or the Americas - our collective security 'headache' would be a great deal less, and so would our security bills. - CM
'He also claimed New Zealand's rights were being denigrated by "misogynist troglodytes from Wogistan".
Any number of ex-Muslim women, such asTaslima Nasreen, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, and Nonie Darwish, would concur with him about the deep misogyny of classical Islam and indeed of Islam-on-the-ground, Islam as lived in dar al Islam and in the Muslim colonies in Europe and elsewhere. - CM
'Since the article was published, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has distanced himself from Mr Prosser's views but confirmed he had spoken with him about the irresponsibility of such a one-sided view.
Mr Peters needs to read Rosemary Sookhdeo's 'Secrets Behind the Burqa' and Nonie Darwish's 'Cruel and Usual Punishment' and Ayaan Hirsi Ali's 'Infidel' and Sultan's 'A God Who Hates'; he might discover that Prosser's views are not 'one-sided' but rather, constitute a brutally true assessment of Islam as such. - CM
"I've told him you cannot go and generalise in the erroneous way he did", Mr Peters said.
Spend a few hours browsing what's on offer, nicely translated, on MEMRI TV, Mr Peters, and you might find that Mr Prosser's generalisation is ...all too terribly accurate. - CM
"He wrongfully impugned millions of law-abiding, peaceful Muslims.
But how do we distinguish those who might really be harmless and 'peaceful' (and will remain so) from those who may be harmless now but will become dangerous later (or whose children or grandchildren, as is happening in France and the UK, will become dangerous); or from those who merely seem harmless but are in fact deadly dangerous, now? What of those who are pursuing the strategy articulated by one Muhammad Taqi Usmani who argued that "Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practise Islam, only until they gain enough power to engage in battle"? 'Our followers must live in peace until strong enough to wage jihad'. As was reported by Andrew Norfolk in an article in the Times Online, September 8, 2007 (I cannot provide a link, as the original link is no longer active). And then there was Hamza Yousuf , an American convert to Islam, who argued - in a lecture at a Muslim gathering in Dubai in 2004, said, "There are times when you have to live like a sheep in order to live in the future like a lion". As mentioned here:
'Mr Prosser agrees that the article did not have balance and does not represent the views of New Zealand First".
'Mr Peters added that Mr Prosser had written the article as a journalist and were from an extreme point of view "which we don't share as a party".
But how, Mr Peters, do you propose to distinguish the Muslim who is harmless and will always remain harmless, from the one who looks harmless but isn't, and from the one who is harmless now but is going to 'flip' and embrace the Sixth Pillar and Go Jihad on you tomorrow, or next week, or next year, or after five or ten years...and will, when he or she does, murder hundreds or thousands of people?
Ali Sina, apostate from Islam, has some grim things to say about the 'myth of the moderate Islam'.
He says, flatly: "Every 'moderate' Muslim is a potential terrorist. The belief in Islam is like a tank of gasoline. It looks innocuous, until it meets the fire. For a 'moderate' Muslim to become a murderous jihadist, all it takes is a spark of faith. It is time to put an end to the charade of "moderate Islam". There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists - moderate they are not".
Probability and statistics, probability and statistics. Ockham's Razor. Precautionary principle. Why should not New Zealand/ Aotearoa, the Land of the Long White Cloud, opt to stop playing what might be called 'Muslim Roulette' and...stop importing identifiable Muslims altogether? Don't just keep them off the planes. Keep them, en masse, out of New Zealand, from this day forward; for if you keep on letting them in, and the Ummah grows larger, and stronger, and perceives itself to be strong, then I guarantee that there will be an attack, or a series of attacks, steadily escalating, and many New Zealanders will be murdered, just as at Madrid, or in London, or in Mumbai. - CM
'Ethnic affairs minister Judith Collins described Mr Prosser's comments as extremely disappointing and feared they could embarrass the country internationally.
'Ethnic affairs'. Islam is not an ethnicity. Islam is a belief system. It is correlated strongly with certain ethnicities, yes, but it is not coterminous with them - many black people, many south asian people, and even quite a few persons of malay and 'middle eastern' descent are not Muslims at all - and it is not transmitted genetically. It is taught, by parents to children and by da'wa artists to gullible new recruits - or by sharia assassins to terrorised new recruits (such as kidnapped Coptic Christian girls or Pakistani Hindu or Christian girls, too many of them minors), willy-nilly. And although it can truthfully be seen as the Arab Imperial Cult, or the Arab National Cult, and Arabisation accompanies thoroughgoing Islamisation, the majority of Muslims today are not ethnically Arab. As for embarrassment: I see nothing embarrassing about stating what is plainly factual; many males belonging to what Churchill called 'the religion of blood and war' have plotted, or attempted, or actually carried out jihad attacks of various kinds on board planes or at airports. Meanwhile, males belonging to other belief systems have carried out rather fewer such attacks. - CM
'New Zealand values diversity and prides itself on being an inclusive society", she said.
Ms Collins needs to inform herself on the subject of Dar al Harb and Dar al Islam and the war that the latter is obliged to wage upon the former until all non-Muslims are converted, or dhimmis, or dead; she needs to read Quran 9: 29, and 9:5, 'the verse of the Sword', and Surah 48: 29 which states that 'those who follow him [Muhammad] are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another"; and she needs to find out about al-wala wa al-baraa, loyalty, which is owed only to Muslims, and enmity (whether passive or, preferably, active) which must be maintained toward non-Muslims unless and until they become Muslims. She might also like to find out what leading modern Muslim 'clerics' such as Al-Tantawi and Yusuf al-Qaradawi have said about Jews - not just Jews in Israel, but about all Jews, everywhere and always. And then she should ask herself: "Do I want to include in New Zealand society people whose cult teaches them to hate and despise and attack Jews? Whose cult explicitly instructs them to hate and war against and seek to subjugate me?" How can one 'include' those whose ultimate goal, 'religiously' defined, is to conquer and subjugate? Who would put an end to the music and art and sculpture, the pet dogs and roast pig dinners, of Pakeha and Maori alike? -CM
"Muslims in New Zealand are also a diverse community - it is simply appalling to profile people based on their religion, skin colour, country of origin or a perceived stereo-typed look, as Mr Prosser has done".
'A diverse community'. But they are all Muslims. They all read the same Quran, Sira and Hadith; they are all obligated to imitate the example of Mohammed. If a cult - an ideology, a belief system - permits and prescribes and sacralises and practises, inter alia, wife-beating, forced marriage of minors, and the taking and sale and use (including the sexual use) of slaves, and if it instructs its followers to wage war upon all non-members until they are converted, or subjugated, or killed - and a significant percentage of its followers are seen doing just that - then looking askance at people whose clothing or country of origin suggest strongly that they may be adherents to that cult is nothing more than commonsense. - CM
"Mr Prosser's anti-Muslim rant has let New Zealand down and as a member of parliament he should know better.
"The Office of Ethnic Affairs (here, again, is this misclassification of Islam under the 'ethnic' rubric - despite the previous claim that it is so wonderfully 'diverse' - CM) works closely with the Muslim community in New Zealand - a community that denounces terrorism and has vowed to work with authorities to counter any terrorism threat".
Oh, I'm sure they've said all the right things, smiling winningly.
But, Ms Collins, you might like to find out a bit more about something called taqiyya, and something called kitman, and something called tawriyya, and you might also like to ask yourself exactly what Islamspeak defines as 'terrorism' and what it does not.
For Muslims 'jihad' - even violent jihad that butchers infidels right and left - is not, strictly speaking, 'terrorism'. Above, I quoted one Hamza Yousuf on the necessity for the Muslim ummah, while it gathers its strength within a host society, to 'lie low', so that it may later 'live like a lion'; the same article reports that he said, "Jihad is actually considered a Rahma (mercy) in Islam". Because, you see, it stops 'oppressors' from 'oppressing'.
And if one carefully examines what Islamspeak means by 'oppression' one discovers that so long as Muslims are not the Top Dogs, and the state within which they live is a non-Muslim state, then ipso facto they are 'oppressed'. For more, see this excellent piece by Daniel Greenfield, 'The Dangers of Legitimising Muslim Grievance',
Excerpt: "The fundamental Muslim grievance is that they are not in power, not just in Israel, where the world has accepted their demand to be in power as a wholly moral and legitimate demand, or throughout the Muslim world, where Western governments have helped bring the Islamists to power with bombs and political pressure. The fundamental grievance is that they are not in power...everywhere".
Abul Kasem, Bengali apostate from Islam, makes exactly the same point at greater length and in detail in his 2005 essay, "When Is Islam Oppressed?"
It is worth noting that he opens the essay by citing a statement made by a Muslim resident in Australia, one Abdul Nacer Benbrika/ Abu Bekr, spiritual leader of a group of Jihad plotters, in an ABC interview: "I am telling you that my religion doesn't tolerate other religion. It doesn't tolerate. The only one law which needs to be spread, it can be here or anywhere else, has to be Islam".
Do you think you can include people who think like that, Ms Collins, New Zealand 'Ethnic Affairs Minister'? Can you 'include' people who have no intention, ultimately, of including you, except as a convert to Islam, or as a despised, exploited and degraded dhimmi near-slave? The thing is, no matter what the smiling taqiyya-masters have told you, that agenda isn't extreme, it isn't an aberration; what Benbrika articulated is bog-standard Islam, Islam, Islam. That's what Islam is all about; it's the grand project that all members of the Ummah are supposed to be engaged in. And that's why, instead of heaping scorn on Mr Prosser's sensible suggestion that it might be prudent, in light of recent bitter experiences, to keep Muslim males of military age away from airplanes full of Infidels, you should be asking yourself whether, rather, it fails in not being anywhere near what is, alas, required. - CM
Posted on 02/12/2013 3:31 AM by Christina McIntosh
13 Feb 2013
After putting up this story, based on the bare-bones version that appeared in Australia's ABC, I checked out how the story was being reported in the New Zealand press. It was a madhouse and a media feeding frenzy. Frantic shrieks of 'racism!' and 'Islamophobia' were rising on all sides (the talkbacks were, on the whole, even worse than the newspaper articles, with only a few Islamosavvy folks manfully trying to uphold the cause of commonsense and civilisational survival in the face of a tsunami of dismally predictable nonsense) and sinister Muslims hastening to pose as poor, persecuted victims (while hinting obliquely that all kinds of nasty things might happen if anybody in New Zealand dares to emit even the tiniest whimper of complaint about Islam or Muslims).
And, alas, poor Mr Prosser has buckled under the pressure of the virtual lynch mob and has issued an abject apology (though he clings to a fragment of commonsense and insists that NZ still needs to think about targeted profiling of air passengers).
But if New Zealanders think that forcing Mr Prosser to shut up and kiss the feet of all those highly-offended Muslims will reduce the likelihood of New Zealand suffering a mass-murderous jihad raid at some time in the future, they are sadly mistaken. Caving in to Muslim whining and threats has made violent jihad attacks more - not less - likely. And all those New Zealanders busy condemning Mr Prosser, and forcing him to recite the mantra that the vast majority of Muslims are just nice, sweet, peaceful folks who want to fit in and get along with their neighbours, are at some point, probably sooner rather than later, going to find out that they were wrong.